Review: 'Pirates Of The Caribbean: On Stranger Tides' finally scuttles the series
Bad action? Jack Sparrow done wrong? It's all here and more.
Johnny Depp and Geoffrey Rush set sail in search of a decent film and come up dry in 'Pirates Of The Caribbean: On Stranger Tides'
It is evidently not a popular opinion to have enjoyed the first three "Pirates Of The Caribbean" films, despite their having made over a billion dollars each worldwide. If you were to listen to Johnny Depp in his recent "Entertainment Weekly" cover story, the films are evidently no good, and the series needed an overhaul moving forward. Personally, I don't buy that. I think the first film is still the one that gets everything right, but the second and third films have many, many things to recommend. If they commit any one sin above all others, it is that they are overstuffed. There is simply too much going on. There's enough material in there for three or four films, and Gore Verbinski seemed to be determined to please you or to pummel you into submission, whichever came first.
If you did not like the second and third film, might I suggest that you skip the new film entirely, and even if you did like the sequels, I'm going to warn you that this latest edition in the franchise, "PIrates Of The Caribbean: On Stranger Tides," is a near-total creative disaster. Since Rob Marshall is directing this time instead of Verbinski, I think it's pretty clear who was keeping the series afloat, and Verbinski's work has never looked better than it does by the end of this new film, which is marred by a leaden pace, a complete inability to stage an action scene, and a wildly misconceived move of Captain Jack Sparrow from drunken clown commenting on the action to the main engine of the movie.
It's almost hard to know where to start in laying out the problems I have with the film, and I feel bad. Disney event movies have been leaving me cold for a while now, no matter how much I want them to work, and I'm starting to see some common problems from film to film, particularly on the script level. Both "Alice In Wonderland" and "TRON: Backstory" are marred by having giant chunks of the films consist of characters standing around telling us about more interesting things that happened between movies. I didn't think that would be a problem with the fourth film in the series, but in their desire to sever themselves from the original trilogy, they've had to refigure almost every key relationship and character in the film, meaning once again, we are treated to an endless buffet of exposition about things we probably should have seen if we're going to invest in any of this nonsense dramatically. At some point, someone at Disney needs to wake up and realize it is ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS more interesting to actually see the drama instead of just watching people stand around in expensive costumes on expensive sets telling us about it.
I also feel bad about picking on Johnny Depp, but the hundreds of millions he's earned on this series so far will probably be enough to dry his bitter tears. I was a Depp fan back when he was still known as box-office poison, and I remember watching the choices he would make in those days, delighted by just how hard he seemed to shirk the burden of being a movie star. Movies like "Dead Man" may not have made any money, but they made me value just how eccentric Depp could be, and just how powerfully his oddball decisions could pay off. These days, it seems like he's settled into a fairly limited bag of tics and tricks, and there's no surprise at all to the work he's doing. He has entered the self-parody phase of his career, and the only performance of his in the last few years where he's felt totally free again was in "Rango," where he didn't even physically appear onscreen. The "Pirates" movies will one day serve as his multi-million dollar mausoleums, gorgeous gilded coffins holding the remains of his once-glorious career. Playing Jack Sparrow is the best thing that ever happened to him financially, but the worst thing creatively, and in this film, more than in any of the others, you can feel the calculation behind every choice. This is a phony piece of work, and Sparrow simply doesn't work as the actual hero of the film. He has to play things far more straight than he did in the first few films, so the little bursts of "Hey, I'm wacky!" that erupt seem more out of character than they did in the initial trilogy. He's loud instead of inventive, frantic instead of funny, and more than anything, he looks like he wishes he and Keith Richards could just leave the set and find a party instead of playing pirate.
Want More...
Pirates of the Caribbean?
- Check out everything there is including photos, reviews, videos.

It's amazing that you can make a film with zombie pirates and killer mermaids boring, but that is not the film's greatest sin. No, that has to be the fact that they shot the film in native 3D in Hawaii, and they somehow manage to make it look like a backlot in a TV movie. How do you shoot Hawaii and make it boring? How do you shoot it in 3D and make it visually uninvolving? Oh, I know… you hire Rob Marshall to direct.
Yes, it's time to put Rob Marshall to bed, folks. Let's acknowledge one of the dirty little secrets of Hollywood right up front: if you liked "Chicago," you can thank Bill Condon for that. Marshall may have been the director, but Condon was the one who figured out how to take a difficult-to-translate show and structure and shoot it as a movie. Marshall was hired for his background as a dance choreographer, and there is nothing in the three films he's made since "Chicago" that would suggest to me that he has any skills as a filmmaker beyond his work with dancers. There's a chase sequence through London in the first third of this film that is totally unmotivated on a story level and that exists simply to waste 20 minutes or so, and it looks like they shot a rehearsal where Marshall told the stunt crew to run through it all at 1/3 speed, deciding to shoot it that way without realizing how bad it would look on film. No surprise, though. He has no feel for action, no flair for comedy, and barely seems able to figure out how to stage basic dialogue. He is inept, top to bottom, and this film reveals every flaw he has as a filmmaker with laser clarity.
So when you read Johnny Depp and Jerry Bruckheimer talking about how this new film returns the series to its roots and how much heart there is this time and how it's a better story than the sequels so far, ignore them. Ignore their craven attempt to milk more money out of the fondness audiences have for Depp's character, and tune out their promises that this is the beginning of a new trilogy of films. This is a naked cash grab, as ugly and hollow and callous as big-budget filmmaking gets. This was genuinely difficult to sit through, and despite knowing that Disney is planning to crank out two more of these, I have to hope against hope that audiences will wise up and reject this one when they get a sniff of just how rancid it is.
Then again, "Alice In Wonderland" made a billion dollars, so maybe there's no limit to the punishment people will subject themselves to just to watch Depp mince around in silly costumes.
You get what you pay for, people. Spend wisely. Steer clear.
"Pirates Of The Caribbean: On Stranger Tides" is unleashed on the public in theaters everywhere May 20, 2011.
News From Our Partners
-
In Pictures: The Stars of Star Trek Into Darkness
Digital Multiplex: The Last Stand, Side Effects, and More
RT on DVD & Blu-Ray: Ambitious, Time-Jumping Epic Cloud Atlas
-
What to Watch Tonight: The Season Finales of Arrow, CSI, and Supernatural
Grimm "The Waking Dead" Review: Dead On Arrival
CBS's 2013-2014 Season: New Nights for Person of Interest and Hawaii Five-0, More Comedy on Thursdays
-
Demi Moore & Ashton Kutcher in $10M Tug of War
'Captain America: The Winter Soldier': Chris Evans, Scarlett Johansson, Anthony Mackie Spotted in D.C. (VIDEO)
Katie Holmes Attracts the Wrong Kind of Attention on 'Mania Days' Set
-
Best Alicia Keys Instagram Photos – Picture Perfect
Taylor Swift Fan Arrested for Swimming Near Her Rhode Island Beach House
Taylor Swift vs. Pink vs. Rihanna vs. Beyonce: Whose Tour Costume Do You Like Best? – Readers Poll
-
Tolerability Index: This week we're barely putting up with The Killing
TV Roundtable: When My Boys tested its prickly chemistry by inviting some new faces to the poker table
The Walkthrough: The New Girl showrunners on topping season two’s big kiss (Part 5 of 5)
-
'Riddick' Trailer: Vin Diesel Is What Goes Bump in the Night
'The Simpsons' Taps Kristen Wiig For Guest Arc As FBI Agent
CBS Fall 2013 Schedule: 'Mike & Molly' to 2014, More Comedy Thursday, and 'Hawaii' to Friday
-
The Telefile - TNT & TBS Upfront 2013: Reaping What Other Networks Sowed
The Telefile - Fall TV 2013: What's On When
The Telefile - New Girl: Wedding Do's and Don'ts
-
'Star Trek' Baddie Benedict Cumberbatch Reveals Role's Biggest Challenge
Cannes Film Festival 2013: Our Must-See Movies
'Star Trek Into Darkness': The Secret Behind The Sounds
Get Instant Alerts on Motion/Captured
Latest Posts
-
David Twohy's latest looks lean and meanWednesday, May 15, 2013
-
Can this series really survive the loss of Justin Lin?Wednesday, May 15, 2013
-
Plus how devoted do you have to be to be called a 'Trekkkie'?Tuesday, May 14, 2013
-
Will he be heading out on a new adventure soon?Tuesday, May 14, 2013


Comments
Option 1
Comment instantly as a guest GuestOption 2
Option 3
Login or create a HitFix account Login Signup- 1
- 2
Next 73 CommentsJoeK
May 14, 2011 at 9:22AM EST Reply to CommentI'm not terribly surprised by your reaction but I'll still be seeing this to judge for myself.
At the same time this odd revisionist stuff that slams the previous movies is obnoxious and, though I'm not comparing the movies at all, kind of reminds me of when it was suddenly a cultural meme to not like Temple of Doom for some damn reason or another. Didn't exactly jive with memories of a 70MM premiere with a box office wait line that stretched for blocks and hours.
Bowker Very astute.
May 14, 2011 at 6:29PM ESTkaunte Well I for one have never liked Temple of doom.
May 17, 2011 at 6:59AM ESTBRIAN I'm sorry to hear that Drew feels Ian McShane is wasted. I thought he was the reason we all wanted to see PIRATES 4. Am I alone in thinking McShane as Blackbeard would be the big draw!?
May 21, 2011 at 8:45AM ESTIt's Al Swearengen we're talking about here!
AC
May 14, 2011 at 9:28AM EST Reply to CommentGood, saves me some money. I agree on Depp selling out with the "Pirates"-movies, but he was recently splendid in "Sweeney Todd" and "Public Enemies". There may be some hope left for him.
Kim Do you even watch any of his interviews? He is not selling out, it just so happens that Jack is one of his favorite rolls to play.
May 15, 2011 at 7:21PM ESTconspiracy
May 14, 2011 at 9:41AM EST Reply to CommentOne had the feeling this was gonna stink after seeing the "Barbossa" character, possibly the best Pirate put to film, dressed like an English Admiral. Don't know why...but it just seemed out of character.
Still...I hold over 100 shares of Disney stock, and know the Disney crowd well...so I hope, and have no doubt, that the brink truck will be heavily laden for the next 3 weeks.
batphantom
May 14, 2011 at 9:47AM EST Reply to CommentYeah, this had "by the numbers" written all over it. I wonder if Depp felt dirty shitting on the sequels and claiming this was much better?
batphantom
May 14, 2011 at 9:47AM EST Reply to CommentAlso, did they leave it wide open for the next film, or is it relatively self-contained?
drew There is a post-credits scene that strongly hints at where the sequels would go. I pray it is a promise they never keep.
May 14, 2011 at 10:10AM ESTbatphantom At least it's not a cliffhanger then. Still, I can't imagine the film will do less than monstrous business, guaranteeing another film where Depp swears it's an improvement on the last.
May 14, 2011 at 10:27AM ESTI. S.
May 14, 2011 at 10:02AM EST Reply to CommentSounds ghastly. Just one thing, though: shooting action in native 3D is difficult. When objects change depth very rapidly, you can end up with an unusable mess when both cameras are focused on the same point. I believe this is why so many people say they will shoot in stereo, only to give up the moment they work out what it actually involves. Hence the flood of post-converted projects originally billed as "3D" (if the planning for these projects is that poor, they should forget about the 3D altogether). In any case, that's probably far from the biggest problem here.
May 14, 2011 at 10:31AM EST Reply to CommentI completely disagree. I saw it Thursday night and had a great time with it, and so did the 3 people with me and the entire full-house audience I saw it with to boot. This review seems awfully and needlessly mean-spirited to me. I'd advise anyone who read this to see it for yourselves first.
drew I think it's exactly "mean-spirited" enough. I am sure all the happy billionaires making their shitty movies will be fine no matter what I say.
May 14, 2011 at 5:13PM ESTStormshadow4life
May 14, 2011 at 11:11AM EST Reply to CommentDamn. I was looking forward to this one too. Although, I guess there's a slight chance I may have a different opinion seeing as I kind of loved everything you disliked about Tron.
Stormshadow4life Although, I 100% agree that Alice In Wonderland was trash
May 14, 2011 at 11:11AM ESTCody
May 14, 2011 at 11:44AM EST Reply to CommentI was worried about this. I will endlessly defend the first two sequels. I love how they expanded the film's world, and still say Bill Nighy's Davy Jones is one of the best movie villains of all time. They were long and perhaps a wee bit overstuffed, but that just made everything feel more fleshed out (to me, at least). All the trailers for this one give me the impression that it's just a lot of goofing around with no strong narrative. The first trilogy had a finite story that evolved over the three films, whereas this appears to be more "Look at all the wacky antics Jack is getting into!"
I will still see it because my love of the first 3 movies gave me enough good will to see this one, but I do have my expectations considerably lowered.
CalGal Can't wait to see this one! Thanks for your "overbloated " review--it must be good!
May 14, 2011 at 12:45PM ESTdrew If that review seems long to you, Calgal, I wonder if you've ever made it through a book. Or a full article in a magazine. Or an entire sentence.
May 15, 2011 at 3:12AM ESTEastRidge6
May 14, 2011 at 12:43PM EST Reply to CommentI'm just disappointed that a film inspired by "On Stranger Tides" was shoe-horned into being a Jack Sparrow movie. I'm sure that taking the "Halloween III" approach was never an option, but I would have liked to have seen an "On Stranger Tides" movie, not one that just strip-mined it for "story material."
lem
May 14, 2011 at 1:09PM EST Reply to CommentOuch! That hurts...I was really looking forward to this. Not so much now....
May 14, 2011 at 2:18PM EST Reply to CommentDrew, a lot of the credit for the success of Chicago must go to Kander and Ebb. Condon and Marshall had outstanding source material to work with.
drew Of course, but the show as presented onstage is decidedly not a movie. Condon figured out how to take that excellent source material and make it work onscreen, something that had eluded several decade's worth of other people's attempts.
May 14, 2011 at 5:15PM ESTScottA
May 14, 2011 at 2:31PM EST Reply to CommentThe single problem with this entire series, since the first (and only good!) movie is this:
In the first movie, the pirates are (rightly) the villains. Even Depp's character is ultimately a bad guy. They are the antagonists, the problem in the movie that needs to be overcome.
Starting with the second movie, they became the good guys, the characters that you are supposed to be rooting for. It turns the whole concept on its ear and makes it silly, ridicululous, uninteresting, and completely unwatchable.
Why should we be rooting for a bunch of thieves, murderers, rapists?
That Werewolf Guy Because they were fighting enemies, who were even worse. (A power hungry admiral who is willing to hang even kids, if they were probably a little bit associated with pirates and Davy Jones, who should make sure that your soul arrive save on the other side, but is more interested in its eternal damnation.)
May 14, 2011 at 2:47PM EST
Because there were all those scenes of them raping entire villages, stealing their possessions, and killing all the children. Oh wait. No, that never happened. Did the pirates ever kill anyone besides fish men and navy officers that were trying to kill them first?(Maybe a few townsfolk from movie 1?) what did they steal besides cursed ancient gold and a tentacle-bearded man's heart? And the raping? Anyone get raped? Nope.
May 14, 2011 at 3:44PM EST
Ryan Powell it is not shown but Pirates are notorious for their murder, rape and pillaging of towns. And I agree with Scotta that is what a bit off-putting that in the later movies the Pirates were made into true heroes instead of the anti-heroes pirates should be. In the first movie it worked best because Orlando Bloom was the true hero of the flick as he was not a pirate...
May 14, 2011 at 4:22PM EST
Yes real pirates did do bad things,but these are make believe.
May 14, 2011 at 5:28PM EST
Did you even see the first movie? Because Orlando Bloom's character was revealed to actually be a pirate and had to embrace that side of himself to do what's right no matter the cost. The "He was a good man and a pirate" Scene between him and Jack lays this out rather clearly.
May 14, 2011 at 5:49PM ESTAnd Jack Sparrow was not ultimately the bad guy. He shot the bad guy through the chest. Always was an anti-hero.
Unk Unk agree with Ryan, these not real pirates!!! These pirates not rape anyone (cause never shown so never happen). Also pirates never take shits because we never see that happen either! If movie say rapists are nice, then they are nice!
May 14, 2011 at 10:55PM ESTOaktown Girl
May 14, 2011 at 2:47PM EST Reply to CommentI loved the first Pirates movie, but never had any interest in seeing the second one because it seemed like it was just overladen with special effects and had lost a lot of the essence that made the first movie so good. And not seeing the second one, I had no interest in watching the third. After reading this though, maybe I will watch those first 2 sequels after all.
From the moment I heard Ian McShane was going to be in the forth installment, I've actually been highly anticipating this one and really wanted to believe this one was going to have more of that same "spirit" as the first. But Drew, yours is not the first review I've seen that this movie is a total mess, and an utter disappointment for everyone who had the same high hopes I did for it. Now after all that anticipation I doubt I'll even pay to see it in the theatre. What a bummer all 'round.
drew Ian McShane is wasted. I honestly forgot he was in the movie. That's how little they use him, and how little impact he has on the film.
May 14, 2011 at 5:16PM ESTO.B. For my part, I really (and only) liked Blackbeard. Ian McShane did a terrific job with the role given to him. For a Disney villain, it was a really good villain.
May 19, 2011 at 8:56AM ESTRest of the film? Erk (special mention to the 'Sirena' line !)
That Werewolf Guy
May 14, 2011 at 2:55PM EST Reply to CommentI really gotta agree on the whole Gore Verbinski thing. He doesn't get enough credit for his work on the POTC series! Just take the last 30 minutes of part 2, which is one convoluted action scene, where a dozen people fight another dozen upside down and round and round all over an island, which then leads to another convoluted action scene, where a giant squid eradicates almost the whole crew of a ship, whith tentacles, explosions and screaming people everywhere! And somehow Verbinski managed to turn this overload into some wonderful set pieces, that never become confusing or boring and are exciting to watch!
Most directors these days can't even direct a simple car chase or fist fight, without giving the audience a headache.
Jeremy
May 14, 2011 at 2:59PM EST Reply to CommentThis is an extremely well-written movie review. Well done, sir. I'll probably still see it, but at least I know going into it that it'll be as much of a waste of $$$ as POTC2 and POTC3 were. : )
Bill Are you a real person?
May 14, 2011 at 4:29PM ESTwhiterok
May 14, 2011 at 3:03PM EST Reply to CommentNot surprised at all. 'Overstuffed' is a great way to describe the first two sequels. But those films really have a great look. Some of the finest visual effects in film. A lot of talent on display.
doopey
May 14, 2011 at 5:27PM EST Reply to CommentDrew- You start by slamming Depp for criticizing DMC and AWE, and then in the same paragraph you repeat the EXACT SAME criticisms yourself. Give me a break...
Unk Unk agree!!! Movie reviewer same thing as movie star who actually made the movies being dissed by himself! Same thing exactly!!! Even Unk understand that!!!
May 14, 2011 at 10:56PM ESTdrew No, I didn't.
May 15, 2011 at 3:12AM ESTNot even close.
And my published reviews of the "Pirates" sequels still represent my POV on them. I don't revise my opinion later because of herd mentality.
doopey Drew: " If they commit any one sin above all others, it is that they are overstuffed. There is simply too much going on. There's enough material in there for three or four films, and Gore Verbinski seemed to be determined to please you or to pummel you into submission, whichever came first."
May 15, 2011 at 10:17AM ESTDepp to EW: “I felt if we were going to do a 4, that more than anything we owed the audience a fresh start, without all the complicated mathematics of 1 colliding with 2 and 2 colliding with 3,†Depp says. “I felt like it was important to eliminate as many complications as possible.â€
Depp: I felt it was important to eliminate as many complications as possible.
May 15, 2011 at 7:00PM ESTTranslation: Fire Orlando Bloom.
Monterey Jack
May 14, 2011 at 11:03PM EST Reply to CommentOuch.
I was hoping that this film would mark a return to the self-contained pleasures of the unpretentious first movie, but this just sounds painful. And while Johnny Depp's bank account must love this franchise, it's sadly forced him to be WACKYWACKYWACKY every second he's been on-screen for the last eight years, squandering his gifts as an actor.
GuanoLad
May 15, 2011 at 12:03AM EST Reply to CommentI'm not going to trust this review this time. These past couple of years I've found that half of Drew's reviews don't match my own feelings on a film, sometimes he likes something I hate or hates something I like, so in this instance I will see it for myself at my own risk.
drew A review isn't about me telling you what you WILL feel. It's telling you what I DO feel. I'm not sure why anyone would expect to agree 100% with anyone on movies. Like any art form, your own experience and taste will affect how you see something. You don't have to "trust" my review, but it is exactly how I felt about the movie, the only point to it.
May 15, 2011 at 1:26AM ESTGuanoLad That isn't my point. Reviews aren't much use after a film, they're to give an idea of what we should spend our money on in anticipation of, and indeed that's what this review is stating outright.
May 15, 2011 at 9:17AM ESTIf, as a reader, I find I agree with your tastes the majority of the time, I'll trust them in anticipation too. But I find lately that's not been happening as much as it used to with your reviews. Our tastes are diverting a lot more often now.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying you're wrong or right to like or dislike whatever, nor for me to differ. I'm just stating that your insight is noted and welcomed, but your conclusion may not guide me.
Having said that, if it turns out I also think the film is awful, I'll be adjusting my opinion of your reviews on an ongoing basis.
Unk Unk agree. Drew you stop trying to analyze movie, who you think you are? Some smart guy? Be more like guy who tells us what toaster to buy!
May 15, 2011 at 10:38AM EST
@Guanolad: Well, his conclusions still can guide you, and seem to be. Since you understand where your tastes diverge. Which is really the way things should be with any reviewer... you follow them enough to have an idea of their tastes, and to know when they like something you may dislike it, or vice versa. Since finding a single reviewer who is actually going to be predictive of everyone's tastes all of the time is impossible. In a very broad sense, a reviewer can at least tell the masses if something is well-made or not on a very basic level. If it's poorly-executed, but still something that's up your alley, go for it.
May 16, 2011 at 5:15PM ESTJay
May 15, 2011 at 12:26AM EST Reply to CommentI'm one of about six people on the planet who hasn't seen any of these movies. I caught the first 20 minutes or so of the first one a few years ago, but that's it. Doesn't feel like I've been missing much.
May 15, 2011 at 12:39AM EST Reply to CommentWhat happen to you Drew? You used to be so cool...well no, not really I mean, that time when you screamed like a troll that you shall never see or speak about Star wars again made me lose whatever amount of respect I had for you. I'll admit that I wasn't (and am not still) excited about this fourth movie, 1 was amazing and charming, 2 was a waste of time and 3 had a great "Return of the Jedi" vibe but failed miserably by the last 40 minutes. Yes Depp was a terrific actor and now he's nothing but a cartoon of his former self, granted, but the bits that i've seen this past week from the movie got me interested enough to take my lazy ass and my girl to the premiere (mexico's). It might be the second interesting thing about this summer right after Potter 7.2 since nothing, and I do mean NOTHING, seems like a sure bet this summer (not even ET 2 aka Super 8). I'll come back tomorrow either with an apology or another insult for you.
drew You really don't have to. After that, I don't care about your apology, and your insults are unwelcome. Feel free to read someone else if your delicate sensibilities are offended by the idea of a $250 million movie being a phony piece of crap.
May 15, 2011 at 1:25AM ESTUnk Unk confused, why Mr. Tovar think anyone give a fuck about him? Me never heard of this guy! Is Tovar so dumb he basically say two out of three movies were failures and not excited about this one, yet his tender feelings hurt that someone didn't like movie?
May 15, 2011 at 1:37AM ESTUnk may just be caveman but Tovar seem like birdbrain!
May 15, 2011 at 1:12AM EST Reply to CommentThat kind of tactic appears to be Promotion 101 now on sequels to draw people back who felt burned by a previous installment, saying "we're back! and you're right those other films sucked, and we know what to do now" only for it to be just as shitty if not worse. I fall for that all the time -- seeing films against my better judgment -- because I so badly want films made by certain talents to be GOOD.
I thought Depp did well in The Tourist. I wish he would go back to working on smaller productions, be like Cage and change it up some times. I've never been a Sparrow fan. Didn't care for Chocolate Factory. Too bad he doesn't get guys like Gilliam and say, "Whatever you want. I'm there."
Chocolat and Charlie And the Chocolate Factory would be an interesting double bill. It would make it seem Depp has a very specific food fetish.
May 15, 2011 at 7:06PM ESTParanoidAndroid
May 15, 2011 at 5:27AM EST Reply to CommentI figured this film wouldn't be good after seeing the completely uninteresting 3D trailer earlier this year.
BRIAN Why would you insist that the trailer be completely "interesting" in a 3D sense? Your post makes it suggest you were looking to be wowed visually by the trailer, and that is not what these films are about. Just sayin'.
May 21, 2011 at 8:28AM ESTHans Moleman
May 15, 2011 at 8:22AM EST Reply to CommentShame to see such a wonderful book turned in to such drek.
ceallaig
May 15, 2011 at 11:44AM EST Reply to CommentWell, forgive me if I choose not to make a judgment before I see the film. It looks like great fun, and I was one of those that actually liked Tron and LOVED Alice in Wonderland. I ask for two things in a film -- tell me a good story, and give me someone to like. I get that from this film, and I will not be disappointed.
Unk Me agree! Me HATE stories with no "good guys" like Goodfellas or Sopranos or film noir pictures! Filled with bad guys! Me want good guy hero to ROOT for!!! And me LOVE good stories like Alice in...wait a second, this not make sense even to caveman!
May 15, 2011 at 1:58PM ESTTM
May 15, 2011 at 4:39PM EST Reply to CommentThank you very much for your review! It's refreshing to see the opinion that is not carefully prepared PR. I've expected exactly what you wrote about the movie. I'm not going to watch this disaster because my favorite character is Will Turner beautifully played by Orlando Bloom is not there. No POTC without him. Elizabeth is not there too and instead we have the weakest choice for the female lead in such movies as Cruz. To exchange Keira for Penelope is madness. The "Sparrow romance" idea is rubbish and goes against the character that Depp was playing before but it looks like he doesn't care and he will do anything the prods say obidiently since the big $$ are involved. Also, I agree with the one who commented and said that it is not interesting to see the movie about bad guys only. Sparrow is a selfish coward and behaved as a jerk many times. Now we are to believe that he is "a hero" because those arond him are worse? I want my good guys back. Will Turner though had to make the hardest choices and to ally with pirates never became a pirate. He stayed true to himself. He stayed a good man and a hero. Kudos to Bloom who managed to keep the character unruined with such bad script as AWE's. I've been a fan of POTC for several years. Sadly, POTC ended with On Stranger Tides to me. :(
May 15, 2011 at 7:24PM EST Reply to CommentI think the main thing about this series that doesn't work is Jack Sparrow is just too weird and swishy a character to work as a romantic action hero lead. He was fine in the first movie where he was basically a comic relief villain, but shoe-horned into the role of hero in the sequels the character is too much to take. Does anyone find any of Jack Sparrow's romantic moments the slightest bit convincing? This is probably the most obviously gay-coded mainstream entertainment character since Paul Lynde's Uncle Arthur on Bewitched. If you told me Jack Sparrow was going to kiss one of the co-leads in the first sequel, Keira Knightly wouldn't be the first one to come to mind.
And it's sort of a shame, because if the character was allowed to actually be gay, I think the movies would be a lot more interesting. though considering that Disney almost fired Depp on the first one because they didn't like his gold teeth, I don't seriously think that would ever happen.
I don't think it was so much switching from a villain to a hero that made it lose what was special, but switching from a weirdo who was legitimately more cunning than everyone else to just a buffoon in the sequels. I think the fun of the performance in the first movie is in that blur between just how much of this is real crazy and how much is a ruse to throw off his enemies. I'm not even sure Sparrow himself knows where the line is. In the sequels, he felt reduced to being just a shrieking weirdo surrounded by a convoluted and inert story.
May 15, 2011 at 10:08PM ESTBRIAN Depp explicitly states that Sparrow is bisexual. Where have you been?
May 21, 2011 at 8:34AM ESTAs far as this "villain" nonsense, Sparrow was always the Han Solo of the piece -- a loveable rogue, amnd yes, a pirate! -- before Depp was even cast. While it's true he wasn't used to full effect, the first two sequels are exceedingly clever in terms of revealing his Bugs Bunny-style schemes and one-upmanship.
kid_idioteque
May 15, 2011 at 10:12PM EST Reply to Comment"PIRATES 2 is one of the best summer entertainments I’ve seen in a while, and it manages to improve on the first film in every way."
Based on that, I can't really take your opinion on the new one seriously, Drew. Dead Man's Chest was easily the worst of the trilogy, and while I do think that the new one looks bland and uninspired, I will give it a shot. The original gave me one of the greatest theater-going experienced I've ever had.
Mari POTC2 is one the best entertainments ever made. I love COTBP but DMC is my favorite from the trilogy actually. The worst of the trilogy was AWE because of the lack of the coherent script, terrible montage, the poor lights dept. work, et., etc. What's most important: it was the worst because of the sickly terrible ending given to the main characters. It left the biggest part of the audience dissapointed and unsatisfied. The good guys were punished cruelly and the bad guys saved their useless lives. However, forgive my curiousity: why do you think that your opinion is the one that should be taking seriously if you are basing your opinion on the fact that someone liked DMC better?
May 16, 2011 at 1:18PM ESTDave Gotta agree with Mari and Drew - I thought DMC was the most fun of the series, though I enjoyed the others as well. Was kind of hoping this would be fun. Now, I'm pretty worried...
May 19, 2011 at 3:49PM ESTBRIAN Mari, what are you smoking! AWE was as good as the first film! The "horrible, cruel" ending you criticise is what's known as a NON-HOLLYWOOD ending where (horrors!) not everything is sweetness and light, like in the watered-down film ending of ROTK (an otherwise fine movie).
May 21, 2011 at 8:39AM ESTDMC isn't bad per se, but it's a bridge film with a lot going on of relatively little consequence. AWE is superior to DMC in every way (save for Norrington's turn as a washed-up sailor which is a cool feature of DMC).
Mari BRIAN, I don't know who was smoking what considering that AWE is a terrible mess full of the plotholes and you haven't noticed that.:) As good as the 1st movie? Wow! The 1st movie is the only that had everythng logically wrapped up. DMC was more spectacular in action but less logical. Norrignton is a perfect example: the character from POTC1 would've never left the city in his charge unprotected to run after some pitiful pirate. I like Norrington. Look what they've done with him in AWE. "Little consequence," really? - Will is sold by this coward Jack to Jones and here starts the major plotline for the next development of the story. And the ending is non-Disney and yes, it is horrors. I think that it's bad to leave 2 main characters who fought hard to be together through the whole trilogy separated in such way. It's sickly cruel what they've done to Will. And it is disgusting that the good people are punished for being good people and for their love and devotion while some useless pirates sailed away to continue with their piracy. That's WRONG. In real life and for the Disney movie especially.
May 21, 2011 at 6:54PM ESTFilmfann
May 15, 2011 at 11:34PM EST Reply to CommentI normally love your reviews, Drew, but I couldn't disagree with you more here. I thought the film was a blast...fun, thrilling, and hugely satisfying. It didn't feel like a cash grab in any way. It felt at all times like Depp and Co. were hell-bent on delivering a fun movie.
- 1
- 2
Next 73 Comments