Lounge of Tomorrow - Get It Off Your (Dead Man's) Chest: Pirates Movie Reviews

Lounge of Tomorrow (http://74.208.121.111/LoT/index.php)

- Beatnik (http://74.208.121.111/LoT/forumdisplay.php?f=9)

- - Get It Off Your (Dead Man's) Chest: Pirates Movie Reviews (http://74.208.121.111/LoT/showthread.php?t=3892)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

I don't see that as being there for exposition so much as for a joke. But maybe people really were confused, I don't know. I though the character motivations were all pretty clear and straightforward so I guess it comes down to just disagreeing.

I personally didn't think it was particularly confusing either...but I can see how people might. They structured it as if it were more complicated than it was (or perhaps as if the writers thought it was more complicated/clever than it was), which did make me at least for a moment start to second guess and overthink, trying to figure out a twist that either I'd missed or might be forthcoming. All of which just becomes distracting and increases the chance of missing some bit here or there.

I'm with you Eliza.

For once I'm on the popular side (if not critically popular side) of a massive box office success. So I'm going to go with the flow of being among the unwashed masses for once.

Looking at the list of Top Opening Weeks of all time (Pirates needs another $21 today and tomorrow, which it will likel get, to top the list) there are only two that I liked (and a third that I admired but couldn't really get into) in the top 20.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moonliner

Open to interpretation say I, but Barbosa it may well be.

Was Davey ever dead? From what I remember in the movie he's just cheating death for the time being and the whole fish DNA mixing is never explained in the slightest.

Lol- did you have any problems with the undead crew concept of the first movie? ;) I believe Davey was cheating death as well, as the destruction of his heart meant his own demise. (Could be wrong, but that's how I understood it).

Well, I for one had problems with the undead crew of the first movie. It's why I didn't like the film the first time I saw it. I thought the undead crew was a gay concept inserted simply to get pirate skeletons into the mix, and thus be twistedly reminiscent of the ride on which they were laying false claim to be inspired by.

I was not keen on the supernatural element. But then I remembered that the ride itself has a cursed treasure with a supernatural element, and all was forgiven in my heart. I still think it's retarded that the movie curse creates a literal skeleton crew, rather than have the crew become zombies that gradually skeletize post-mortem.

The pic was so spirited and fun that I acquiessed to its chosen conceipt.

This time, it's the mythological aspect that I don't like at all. Too much sea beastie and Davy Jones and unexplained squid crew ... and not enough damnable PIRACY.

So, you're saying that you are disinclined to acquiesce this time?;)

Finally saw it last night.

It was a bad movie.

And I enjoyed it very much.

Some of the holes annoyed me tremendously. The one that really sticks out in my mind was when they were having the three-way sword fight. It took place on old buildings that were so old that the STONE was crumblng away. Yet a THATCH roof was still intact that was able to support three men in a sword fight?!?

WTF?

Oh...

and the witch woman was hot!

My boyfriend & I saw it last night. Sold out, seated in the front row! My eyes looked like Kaa's halfway through the trailers. As for the movie?

I loved it. How do you like them doubloons? :D

Still, there were a few elements that I didn't exactly love (and many of you have mentioned some of these elements! Props to you!)

1.) *Elizabeth Swann's transformation. She was defending Jack ("CAPTAIN Jack Sparrow!) in the very beginning, and by the end, she had turned sinister. However, maybe it was the turn Jack had predicted..her curiosity. Still, I didn't see her sinking to that level.

2.) *The Kraken (I so want to spell it Crackin'. Like snappin' & poppin'). While enjoyable to watch, it soon became very Harryhausen. While I totally dig on & love the works of Ray Harryhausen (Jason & The Argonauts ROCKS) this just didn't seem to work afterwhile.

3.)*The open ending. It was too, too open. I sat there waiting for more, and felt cheated. However, if the trick is to leave me wanting resolution to the point of fighting the throngs of equally excited ticket-buying buccaneers for the next installement then ,why yes, the trick worked quite well.

Wait..was I supposed to spoiler tag these? Have we abandoned tags? Have we all seen the flick? Am I just a no spoiler-tag respecting, thoughtless dick? Um, don't answer.... :p ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by AllyOfTheDolls

3.)*The open ending. It was too, too open. I sat there waiting for more, and felt cheated. However, if the trick is to leave me wanting resolution to the point of fighting the throngs of equally excited ticket-buying buccaneers for the next installement then ,why yes, the trick worked quite well.

the EW review (or CNN) was very clear that this movie felt like the middle of a trilogy, there was no concise ending, no wrap ups to the story... just a hang. I think this must be one of the many drawbacks to making two movies at once.

Quote:

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

Ah, see, we are completely at odds then. It's the supernatural and mythological backbones that drew me to these movies in the first place. So I revel in the skeletons and sea creatures (which are, IMO, also explained by the crews damnation. I read it as an aquatic version of Dante's Inferno, and the more time you serve the worse off you are. You curse your body and soul when you become a member of Davy Jones' crew. Your transformed by the sea you love, and your transformed into a freak - a hybird of human and sea life. I totally love that.