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

€uroMeinke · 07-13-2006, 03:34 PM

I also liked the fish crew, but I was a bit dissappointed about Davy Jones, he just didn't seem demonic/Mephisto enough for me. It seemd to easy to get the key while he was sleeping - there needed to be some other special circumstances, an enchantment to put him under, or bettter yet tricking the devil himself, though that's a better job for Captain Jack Sparrow, than sweat dull Will Turner...

Eliza Hodgkins 1812 · 07-13-2006, 04:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by €uroMeinke

I also liked the fish crew, but I was a bit dissappointed about Davy Jones, he just didn't seem demonic/Mephisto enough for me. It seemd to easy to get the key while he was sleeping - there needed to be some other special circumstances, an enchantment to put him under, or bettter yet tricking the devil himself, though that's a better job for Captain Jack Sparrow, than sweat dull Will Turner...

I'm sure Sparrow will find a way to cheat the devil. I do love that he had to make a deal with a devil to get his precious Pearl in the first place.

I'm a huge fan of Nighy's, so maybe I'm just in the camp that he can do no wrong. I loved his portrayal of the character, who does seem both evil *and* tragic. The musical locket that was playing seemed enchantment enough for me. Talks of weddings and lovers (from Sparrow's mouth, no less), seemed to put in him a vulnerable state. I got the feeling he didn't usually allow himself to be caught so unawares.

innerSpaceman · 07-13-2006, 07:20 PM

I'm with € on Jones ... none too Mephisto for my tastes. And even allowing for the sillyness of this film, stealing the key was absurd.

I just want pirates, not supernatural shenanigans. In the ride, there may be a curse ... but the pirates are not the ones affected by it. The ride depicts true-life pirate adventures (albeit cleaned up to delightful effect - - heheh, a happy townburning!). The curse happens to the audience.

If there were zombies and sea monsters in Walt's attraction, I daresay the silliness of it would have affected its popularity adversely.

Sure, they were wise to include creepy skeletons. Creepiness sure, silliness, no. Not that the comedy in the attraction isn't silly - - - it surely is. The tone goes from mysterious to lighthearted and back & forth from there. But there's no silly gimmicks in the depiction of pirate activities to detract from the actual appeal of pirates, real pirates, that the enjoyment of the ride is predicated on.

I'm sorry the film series had to go more gimmicky. They wanted their skeletons, so zombies it was. Instant skeletal zombies at that.

I'm hardly surprised the impulse I disliked in the first movie was amplified times seven in the sequels. That's what sequels are for: to accentuate all that is crappy and, by their bad example, demonstrate what a good movie really is.

"Dead Man's Chest" fulfills its purpose well.

Eliza Hodgkins 1812 · 07-13-2006, 07:34 PM

The problem with a movie about "real pirtes" is that it's not much fun watching men actually rape, pillage, die of scurvy, etc. So inserting curses, skeletons and sea creature hybrids as foes the pirates must battle against is preferable to watching them rape and pillage for 2.5 hours, at least for me.

Plus, I love fantasy. So I'm happy that's the route these films have taken.

innerSpaceman · 07-13-2006, 07:47 PM

Well, most people hated it ... but I'm a big fan of Roman Polanski's "Pirates" with Walter Matthau. Nothing but wall-to-wall piracy, and making light of it in the same successful way that Walt Disney did. I think that movie's a hoot, and I would have loved Curse o' the Pearl just as much, perhaps more, if they'd left the instant-zombies out.

Just one man's opinion. I like pirates, I think they're fun and interesting. No embellishment needed for one of history's most outlandish elements.

innerSpaceman · 07-13-2006, 09:19 PM

P.S. - I'm watching Black Pearl right now, to wash the taste of DMC out of my eyes. It's not doing a very good job of it.

Now that my mind's on the stupidity of the Aztec Gold curse, I find I can get over the instant skeletization, but NOT the instant raggediness and tatterization of clothing. WTF? Stupid, stupid, frelling stupid.

The action, on the other hand, is spirited and exaggerated without being stupifyingly absurd. They could well have opted for two more films filled with Errol-Flynnlike derring do. It worked beautifully in the first film. Stooping to shish-ke-bop fruit fights and rolling waterwheel duels was unnecessary sequelitis. Beyond, far beyond, stupid.

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.

lashbear · 07-14-2006, 07:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ponine

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.

I call it the "Back To The Future Syndrome"

...Also, they filmed a lot of it in really shallow turquoise water that's allegedly Kraken-deep ! Water that colour is shallow.

I also have trouble reconciling the fact that the dialogue refers to the fact that the Kraken will attack the person that has the mark, (but it doesn't.)

I was the ONLY person left in the cinema to see the ending.

.....Lashstoat had to run off to the loo cos it was so long.

Can't wait for the DVD and the bloopers.

lashbear · 07-14-2006, 07:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by €uroMeinke

......I was a bit dissappointed about Davy Jones, he just didn't seem demonic/Mephisto enough for me. It seemd to easy to get the key while he was sleeping ...

Looked to me to be no harder than your average game of "Operation" - I wonder if his tentacles light up red if you're trembling too much ?

07-13-2006, 03:34 PM	#121
€uroMeinke L'Hédoniste Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: A.S.C.O.T. Posts: 8,671	I also liked the fish crew, but I was a bit dissappointed about Davy Jones, he just didn't seem demonic/Mephisto enough for me. It seemd to easy to get the key while he was sleeping - there needed to be some other special circumstances, an enchantment to put him under, or bettter yet tricking the devil himself, though that's a better job for Captain Jack Sparrow, than sweat dull Will Turner... __________________ I would believe only in a God that knows how to Dance. Friedrich Nietzsche
	Submit to Quotes

07-13-2006, 07:20 PM	#123
innerSpaceman Kink of Swank Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Inner Space Posts: 13,075	I'm with € on Jones ... none too Mephisto for my tastes. And even allowing for the sillyness of this film, stealing the key was absurd. I just want pirates, not supernatural shenanigans. In the ride, there may be a curse ... but the pirates are not the ones affected by it. The ride depicts true-life pirate adventures (albeit cleaned up to delightful effect - - heheh, a happy townburning!). The curse happens to the audience. If there were zombies and sea monsters in Walt's attraction, I daresay the silliness of it would have affected its popularity adversely. Sure, they were wise to include creepy skeletons. Creepiness sure, silliness, no. Not that the comedy in the attraction isn't silly - - - it surely is. The tone goes from mysterious to lighthearted and back & forth from there. But there's no silly gimmicks in the depiction of pirate activities to detract from the actual appeal of pirates, real pirates, that the enjoyment of the ride is predicated on. I'm sorry the film series had to go more gimmicky. They wanted their skeletons, so zombies it was. Instant skeletal zombies at that. I'm hardly surprised the impulse I disliked in the first movie was amplified times seven in the sequels. That's what sequels are for: to accentuate all that is crappy and, by their bad example, demonstrate what a good movie really is. "Dead Man's Chest" fulfills its purpose well.
	Submit to Quotes

07-13-2006, 07:34 PM	#124
Eliza Hodgkins 1812 Sputnik Sweetheart Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Long Beach Posts: 2,685	The problem with a movie about "real pirtes" is that it's not much fun watching men actually rape, pillage, die of scurvy, etc. So inserting curses, skeletons and sea creature hybrids as foes the pirates must battle against is preferable to watching them rape and pillage for 2.5 hours, at least for me. Plus, I love fantasy. So I'm happy that's the route these films have taken.
	Submit to Quotes

07-13-2006, 07:47 PM	#125
innerSpaceman Kink of Swank Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Inner Space Posts: 13,075	Well, most people hated it ... but I'm a big fan of Roman Polanski's "Pirates" with Walter Matthau. Nothing but wall-to-wall piracy, and making light of it in the same successful way that Walt Disney did. I think that movie's a hoot, and I would have loved Curse o' the Pearl just as much, perhaps more, if they'd left the instant-zombies out. Just one man's opinion. I like pirates, I think they're fun and interesting. No embellishment needed for one of history's most outlandish elements.
	Submit to Quotes

07-13-2006, 09:19 PM	#126
innerSpaceman Kink of Swank Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Inner Space Posts: 13,075	P.S. - I'm watching Black Pearl right now, to wash the taste of DMC out of my eyes. It's not doing a very good job of it. Now that my mind's on the stupidity of the Aztec Gold curse, I find I can get over the instant skeletization, but NOT the instant raggediness and tatterization of clothing. WTF? Stupid, stupid, frelling stupid. The action, on the other hand, is spirited and exaggerated without being stupifyingly absurd. They could well have opted for two more films filled with Errol-Flynnlike derring do. It worked beautifully in the first film. Stooping to shish-ke-bop fruit fights and rolling waterwheel duels was unnecessary sequelitis. Beyond, far beyond, stupid.
	Submit to Quotes

07-13-2006, 10:41 PM	#127
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	#128
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