[Jane Sherwood]

And suddenly, when I reread that post and put in "hamsterfied" in the place of "hamfisted" I get the weirdest mental-movie of Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Hamster Dance! And all the characters are turned into dancing hamsters.

Such is the stuff of nightmares...and yet, I feel strangely delighted at the same time.

[Chefelf]

Small bite at this film: in two separate action sequences, characters are trapped inside a rolling object. Why did we get that twice?

Thank GOD I am not the only person who was annoyed by this. This was a really sloppy bit of filmmaking. Firstly, both circumstances did not necessitate staying in or on the rolling object. The "cage" had holes about double the size of the average human torso. If that's not a strong enough objection, one of them was a midget and most likely would have fallen out if he didn't try to escape. Secondly the sword fight on the rolling water mill thingy (while funny and over the top at first) wore thin after the first 10-15 minutes. I understand that it's a movie and it was an action sequence but why not just jump off and continue your swordfight that way?

Did anyone else find the movie to be, at many points, completely incomprehensible? The stupid sequence where Jack is a god on that island (apart from being extremely racist) was completely unnecessary and didn't serve any point in furthering the plot other than them getting the ship. The same could have been accomplished with a 5 minute suspense sequence where they try to get the ship and then almost don't.

I couldn't believe how poor this movie was. I'd heard that "it wasn't as good as the first one" but, while that statement is true, it doesn't quite nail the point home as fully as a more accurate statement such as, "That movie was really, really quite poor."

[civilian_number_two]

I won't go as far as to say that the Chief Jack sequence was racist. I thought it was fairly typical of Pirate literature that at some point they'd end up among some savages at some time. It's so typical in fact that it was used as a throwaway line in the first PIRATES. Before Jack saves Elizabeth, we cut into a conversation with the two dock guards, where he's saying "...and then they made me their chief."

But yeah. You'll meet resistance from Jane on this one, but I thought the middle installment was fairly muddled.

[Jen]

I also couldn't believe what a lousy follow-up to a really excellent original film this was.

Civ makes a good point re: pirate literature historical tradition and the savages. That being said, I couldn't believe they spent 45 minutes on a cannibal island while painted men jumped around with spears. I missed that throwaway line from the original, which makes me sad, because that is kinda hilarious taken on its own, but kinda lame in light of the ooga-booga antics in the second. And, as Chefelf points out, their little adventure had absolutely nothing to do with the rest of the film's narrative arc (which was also pretty weak. I didn't follow a lot of it. Liked the bayou woman, though!)

Also? The hammerhead shark henchman?


WTF?!?!

[J m HofMarN]

I think the film was trying to be more impressive than POTC 1. Involving Davy Jones, which is basically the name for Satan in nautical tradition, was completely over the top, and as I pointed out in my first post I also found the water wheel and rolly cage antics to be the same. The fact that they had to rewrite Jack's history in an absurd way also irks me. You know, Jack, you can get a pirate ship without having to sell your soul to the devil. I mean hell, you and Will took like three of them during the first movie. Obviously the rum was not gone the night he made that promise.

[Lord Aquaman]

Okay, just going in with my own thoughts having just seen the movie -

Sequels are a tricky business. It's so hard to live up to the first one, let alone surpass it. More often than not, sequels often just feel like vain imitations/remakes/rehashes of the films that spawned them as the same basic formula is usually just flogged to death (Rocky's 2-5 and Matrix's Reloaded/Revolution come to mind here). There are exceptions, such as "The Empire Strikes Back", but they are few and far between. For the most part I enjoyed "Dead Man's Chest" but I cannot deny that the original film was superior.

The biggest sin of "Dead Man's Chest" is that it runs too long and tries to over-stuff itself, cutting back & forth between Jack Sparrow's antics, the misfortunes of Will or the misfortunes of Elizabeth, which then leads us to the misfortunes of Norrington, with a lot of action thrown in, whereas the first film had a more focused, driven feel to it. I saw the film with my dad and he commented that it felt like they took a book, ripped out the most interesting/exciting parts and then pasted it together in no particular order. Most criminally, the storyline with Will catching up with the sea zombie version of his father Bootstrap Bill Turner (Stellan Skarsgard buried under tons of prosthetic makeup & CGI) is probably the most interesting storyline going in the movie, but it deserves more time than it ultimately gets. The decision to turn Norrington into a full blown evil bastard was unexpected - I know he wasn't exactly the hero of the first film, but he wasn't the villain either, just the romantic rival (I blame this on the fact that they cut scenes that were meant to establish him as a nicer guy). The thing with Elizabeth becoming infatuated with Jack, or at least appearing to become infatuated with him, was a relatively minor offense but still an annoying one. It felt like the writers were trying too hard to both play to the popularity of Depp/Jack and also to try and resurrect the opposites attract magic of Princess Leia & Han Solo, the primary difference being that Solo was taller, better looking, had better equipment and had better hygiene than Sparrow. That seemed to go against part of Elizabeth's realizations in the first film that pirates weren't all they were cracked up to be, and she struck me as being smarter than to fall for an obvious scoundrel like Jack. Or maybe I'm just over-reacting to their decision to put the young lovebirds fate in doubt. And there are some who will undoubtedly be annoyed by the cliff-hanger setting up "Pirates 3: The Pirate Version of the Search For Spock".

Okay, stuff I actually did like... there were some genuinely funny moments (some of which were overplayed), the action set pieces were well staged & well executed (if a little over the top), and the actors were generally good. Johnny Depp basically rehashes his performance from the first film, which works well enough since he still appears to be having fun as the drunken glam rocker pirate. Orlando Bloom is good in his usual low-key way (though he's basically got himself typecast as the earnest young hero and will probably spend the rest of his career being accused of just playing himself in every film he does).Nighy & Starsgard were good along with the rest of the undead crew, though they are basically a steroid fueled remake of the undead crew from "Curse". Keira Knightley was alright, though in a few scenes it felt like she was trying too hard (namely the ones where she's supposed to act like she's becoming infatuated with Jack). I guess I'm not being very positive here, am I? Well, if I make the film out to be worse than it actually is, I'm sorry. Just go in knowing that it's not as bad as the Star Wars prequel trilogy, Batman & Robin, Daredevil, Elektra, 2005 Fantastic Four and Catwoman.

Now go hide the rum.

[Jane Sherwood]

I've seen it a few more times now, and you know what?

I stand by my opinion completely and hold all extreme judgment until May, when the story comes to an end.

And as far as Jack's history goes, I found this interesting little tidbit on Wikipedia:

According to the official Disney website and the game based on the film series, Jack Sparrow was once employed by the East India Trading Company. He helmed the Wicked Wench, an EITC merchant vessel, performing odd jobs for Lord Cutler Beckett. However, when Sparrow refused to transport slaves, Beckett sanctioned the torching (and sinking) of the Wicked Wench, and branded Jack Sparrow a pirate. Jack came to embrace his outlaw status, becoming a successful pirate with no desire to return to life under the command of others. Later, Jack petitioned Davy Jones to raise his ship from the ocean floor. He rechristened her as The Black Pearl.

This post has been edited by Jane Sherwood: 22 August 2006 - 09:44 PM

[Lord Aquaman]

I think "Dead Man's Chest", to a certain extent, tried too hard to be like "The Empire Strikes Back" on the high seas. How about you?

[civilian_number_two]

I disagree. While EMPIRE did leave a series of cliffhangers, it had an ending of sorts. PIRATES 2 didn't so much end as it just stopped.

[J m HofMarN]

In light of Jane's devotion to what, if this were Star Trek would be called utter nerdery, I must withdraw my comments about rewriting Jack's history. However its still stupid to make a deal with the devil to get a pirate ship when you can just steal one like a good pirate.

[Mirithorn]

But it was a REALLY NICE pirate ship.

[Gobbler]

Kinda funny that it really was, what with all the holes in it.

[Jane Sherwood]

Well, the Pearl meant everything to Jack, maybe in the last movie we'll really find out why.

[Gobbler]

Maybe he's locked his heart inside of it. Wouldn't that be surprising?

[J m HofMarN]

Or his rum. Most likely his rum.