Get It Off Your (Dead Man's) Chest: Pirates Movie Reviews - Page 13

Alex · 07-13-2006, 10:41 PM

Why do you find the nature of magic (which is even more disordered in nature) in the Harry Potter movies to be acceptible and have a problem with a curse that immediately turns you into a zombie skeleton when exposed to moonlight?

Exactly what are the rational rules of magic?

innerSpaceman · 07-14-2006, 06:53 AM

Ah, but there are very rationale rules of magic in the Harry Potter series, rules that simply are not violated in the films. In fact, it's really quite easy for a film or story to get away with any "rules" of magic they'd like; simply set it up. Explain it with some dialogue or demonstration, and literally anything's possible.

I just think Pirates set up the rules of its curse in a most sloppy and haphazard way. The only dialogue explanation really given is that the moonlight reveals the cursed as they really are. And it is demonstrated that newbies to the curse are instantly skeletons ... and, yes, skeletons with raggedly clothing - the better to see their skelliness. But yeah, if a curse or magic also acts upon your clothing, for effect that is purely show and zero curse, I want that told to me.

Otherwise, it's the rules of cartoon magic where hats stay on no matter what.

In the generally accepted rules of live-action magic ... if, for example, you were shrunk to the size of a sandwich, you'd be left swimming in your suddenly-oversized clothing. In cartoon magic, your clothes are shrunk with you. I don't like cartoon magic mixed in with my live-action magic without so much as a faire thee well.

And while I'm at it ... all through the movie, cursed pirates are shown to recover from bullet holes and knife wounds INSTANTLY. Yet, there's time for a line or two of dialogue and some meaningful glances between the time Barbossa is shot and the time Will drops the coin and his blood into the Aztec treasure chest. I call shenanigans. The magic in this film is poorly explained, has absurdities not reckoned with the audience, and follows its internal rules if and when it wants to.

Perhaps the Pirate Code can be more like guidelines, but magic must not be.

Alex · 07-14-2006, 09:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

But yeah, if a curse or magic also acts upon your clothing, for effect that is purely show and zero curse, I want that told to me.

That really makes no sense. You are shown how the curse works but it is only acceptable if some character looks at the audience and offers a lecture on the mechanics? To me that is like complaining that hyperspace engines are cartoon-physics mixed in with live action physics because Han Solo never pauses to explain how they work.

I also disagree that there is an explained underlying order to the Harry Potter world of magic. Maybe in the books there is, but not in the movies.

But it sounds like you're working yourself back into disliking Curse of the Black Pearl.

Gemini Cricket · 07-14-2006, 09:08 AM

Was there an explaination during DMC of why all the pirates on DJ's ship are meshed together with sea creatures? I forget.

Alex · 07-14-2006, 09:37 AM

It was said that over the course of the 100 year oath of service you blend with the sea, eventually ending up like the guy who was just coral attached to a wall of the boat.

Not Afraid · 07-14-2006, 09:48 AM

I've already stated that I am not too fond of the CGI effects in DMC, but I also find I am rolling my eyes everytime the hammerhead guy is brought up. I think it bothers me so much because it is soooooo out there. The other have attachments of sea creatures but it is concievable the shape of their head remains the same. The hammerhead guy was a cartoon and, each time he appeared, I was taken out of the movie.

I realize I don't see a lot of "fantasy" or "Super hero" films, so I have limited acceptance, but I can't be the only one who felt this way.

Or maybe I can.

Ghoulish Delight · 07-14-2006, 09:49 AM

Totally, the hammerhead guy was the most distracting and outlandish of the bunch.

Gemini Cricket · 07-14-2006, 10:02 AM

To me, Shell Head was more cartoony than Hammerhead Man. But Davey was right on the money for me.

Not Afraid · 07-14-2006, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gemini Cricket

To me, Shell Head was more cartoony than Hammerhead Man. But Davey was right on the money for me.

I agree, he was, but he appeared in a "comedic" part, so I didn't really have to take him seriouslt. The hammerhead guy should've been taken seriously. He was supposed to be menancing.

Alex · 07-14-2006, 12:24 PM

My only problem with hammerhead was that the shark eyes appear non-functional. I kept expecting something that would make use of the fact that he had four-eyes.

07-13-2006, 10:41 PM	#1
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	Why do you find the nature of magic (which is even more disordered in nature) in the Harry Potter movies to be acceptible and have a problem with a curse that immediately turns you into a zombie skeleton when exposed to moonlight? Exactly what are the rational rules of magic?
	Submit to Quotes

07-14-2006, 06:53 AM	#2
innerSpaceman Kink of Swank Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Inner Space Posts: 13,075	Ah, but there are very rationale rules of magic in the Harry Potter series, rules that simply are not violated in the films. In fact, it's really quite easy for a film or story to get away with any "rules" of magic they'd like; simply set it up. Explain it with some dialogue or demonstration, and literally anything's possible. I just think Pirates set up the rules of its curse in a most sloppy and haphazard way. The only dialogue explanation really given is that the moonlight reveals the cursed as they really are. And it is demonstrated that newbies to the curse are instantly skeletons ... and, yes, skeletons with raggedly clothing - the better to see their skelliness. But yeah, if a curse or magic also acts upon your clothing, for effect that is purely show and zero curse, I want that told to me. Otherwise, it's the rules of cartoon magic where hats stay on no matter what. In the generally accepted rules of live-action magic ... if, for example, you were shrunk to the size of a sandwich, you'd be left swimming in your suddenly-oversized clothing. In cartoon magic, your clothes are shrunk with you. I don't like cartoon magic mixed in with my live-action magic without so much as a faire thee well. And while I'm at it ... all through the movie, cursed pirates are shown to recover from bullet holes and knife wounds INSTANTLY. Yet, there's time for a line or two of dialogue and some meaningful glances between the time Barbossa is shot and the time Will drops the coin and his blood into the Aztec treasure chest. I call shenanigans. The magic in this film is poorly explained, has absurdities not reckoned with the audience, and follows its internal rules if and when it wants to. Perhaps the Pirate Code can be more like guidelines, but magic must not be.
	Submit to Quotes

07-14-2006, 09:08 AM	#4
Gemini Cricket ... Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 13,244	Was there an explaination during DMC of why all the pirates on DJ's ship are meshed together with sea creatures? I forget.
	Submit to Quotes

07-14-2006, 09:37 AM	#5
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	It was said that over the course of the 100 year oath of service you blend with the sea, eventually ending up like the guy who was just coral attached to a wall of the boat.
	Submit to Quotes

07-14-2006, 09:48 AM	#6
Not Afraid HI! Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 17,108	I've already stated that I am not too fond of the CGI effects in DMC, but I also find I am rolling my eyes everytime the hammerhead guy is brought up. I think it bothers me so much because it is soooooo out there. The other have attachments of sea creatures but it is concievable the shape of their head remains the same. The hammerhead guy was a cartoon and, each time he appeared, I was taken out of the movie. I realize I don't see a lot of "fantasy" or "Super hero" films, so I have limited acceptance, but I can't be the only one who felt this way. Or maybe I can.
	Submit to Quotes

07-14-2006, 09:49 AM	#7
Ghoulish Delight I Floop the Pig Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Alternative Swankstyle Posts: 19,348	Totally, the hammerhead guy was the most distracting and outlandish of the bunch. __________________ 'He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.' -TJ
	Submit to Quotes

07-14-2006, 10:02 AM	#8
Gemini Cricket ... Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 13,244	To me, Shell Head was more cartoony than Hammerhead Man. But Davey was right on the money for me.
	Submit to Quotes

07-14-2006, 12:24 PM	#10
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	My only problem with hammerhead was that the shark eyes appear non-functional. I kept expecting something that would make use of the fact that he had four-eyes.
	Submit to Quotes