-Not Logged In-

Jump to content

Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

- - - - -

Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End (Reviews Only)

  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 of 10 OFFLINE   Chuck Mayer

Chuck Mayer

    Lead Actor

  • 8,077 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 06 2001
  • Real Name:Chuck Mayer
  • LocationNorthern Virginia

Posted May 24 2007 - 03:16 PM


Not doing too well this summer. I skipped Shrek 3, but I imagine it had the same issues as Spidey 3 and Pirates 3. I guess the cycle is turning, because it feels like 1996-1997. Spectacle is trumping competent storytelling.

That said, Pirates 3 boasts some great scenes, some spectacular effects, and a very rousing score (that I will be getting). It's not all bad, and often it managed to rise above the tepid script and weak momentum.

About 1/2 of it merely spins wheels, waiting to get to the point. Imagine a three hour film of Captain Jack spinning around the rope from Pirates 1. What works in small doses irritates in large ones. I don't like characters winking at the audience (not literally, but you know what I mean) in EVERY scene. It's the classic case of liking your characters too much as a writer...they become caricatures (and the characters didn't have far to go to get there from where they started).

But all is not lost. I think it's worse than DMC, which was worse than TBP. But it's still not bad...just mediocre. Some good stuff, some bad stuff.

The audience I was with seemed to like it a lot...they laughed everywhere the filmmakers wanted them to. They clapped at the end. Teenagers...

Buyer beware,
Hey buddy...did you just see a real bright light?

#2 of 10 OFFLINE   Tim Glover

Tim Glover

    Lead Actor

  • 7,908 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 12 1999
  • Real Name:Tim Glover

Posted May 24 2007 - 04:29 PM

Just got back myself and agree almost verbatim with Chuck's review. Crap, what a disappointment. Posted Image REALLY wanted to like this one.

The Not So Good:

1. Way too Long. Length is NOT a problem when it works. This one doesn't. Your begging for the ending.
2. Too many intentional funny stuff that fell rather flat. Going to the well so much, WAY too much.
3. Not enough history about Beckett. Missed opportunity here.
4. Shipwreck Island or whatever it's called was a big dud.

There's more but I'm too bummed out to list them. Posted Image

The Good:
1. Some pretty cool action moments...
2. Davy Jones remains the single most effective CGI I've EVER seen. Ever. Amazing.
3. Some of the humor actually does work.
4. I liked the ending.

And like Chuck's crowd, our packed crowd LOVED every minute of it. Laughed, clapped, cheered you name it.

Such a disappointment considering how much I adore the original Curse Of The Black Pearl.

What's happening with this Summer? Posted Image Thank God for the Bourne Series. Posted Image


#3 of 10 OFFLINE   Patrick Sun

Patrick Sun

    Studio Mogul

  • 38,340 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 30 1999

Posted May 24 2007 - 05:08 PM

I had the misfortune of sitting next to a young lady who would giggle at every little comedic bit, unfortunately, there are too many of those moments in this film, as if the filmmakers were too scared to bore the audience from its excessive run time, so they crafted far way many scenes to elicit audience chuckles, but in doing so, it undermined too many moments in the film itself that should have had a more serious tone to the situation at hand. There's a decent 2 hour film somewhere in the 160+ minutes of run time in this film. The screenplay is messy, and while the game of who's trying to pull the wool over the other's eyes seems confusing (but it's not), it also felt unnecessary and reduced the film into a mish-mash of scenes that just didn't drive the narrative in an engaging manner. There are some pretty eye-popping action sequences, but some of them border on the absurd as well. Whenever the film focused on William and Elizabeth, the film skidded to a halt, but thankfully there weren't that many of those kinds of scenes. Jack was whimsically portrayed once again, but Depp made most of his scenes work, even if they went on far too long in spots. Be sure to stay to the very, very end of the credits, there's one more last scene for those with the bladders and patience to wait through the credits. I give it 2.5 stars, or a grade of C+.
"Jee-sus, it's like Iwo Jima out there" - Roger Sterling on "Mad Men"
Patcave | 2006 Films | 2007 Films | Flickr | Comic-Con 2012 | Dragon*Con 2012

#4 of 10 OFFLINE   Robert Crawford

Robert Crawford


  • 27,386 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 09 1998
  • Real Name:Robert
  • LocationMichigan

Posted May 24 2007 - 09:27 PM

Please, post reviews only in this thread. Thank you.


#5 of 10 OFFLINE   Chad R

Chad R


  • 2,179 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 14 1999
  • Real Name:Chad Rouch

Posted May 25 2007 - 08:33 AM

All three "Pirates of the Caribbean" films suffer the same dreadful flaw -- second acts that plod. Their first and third acts zip along at wonderful paces, but for some reasons the only way the screenwriters can figure to get their chracters from A to B, is with a lot of talking. A LOT of talking. However, what all three don't have -- and is the main reason the first and third films are so much more fun than the second is Geoffrey Rush. Sure, Johhny Depp is alot of fun to watch, but he's most fun to watch when he has an actor playing against him who can stand toe to toe with him. That's Rush. Knightley and Bloom just aren't accomplished enough actors, or big enough presences, for Depp to play off the way he does Rush. You get the sense that these guys are constantly trying to top each other as actors, a sensibility that bleeds through to their characters and makes watching them a sparkling good time. Sure, there's a plot. A bit too much of it revealed through the afforementioned abundance of talking. And despite many people's assertions that it's hard to follow, I had no difficulty with it. In fact, many of their so called twists I saw coming a few leagues away. It's just that the development, the second act, all of the talking, isn't that interesting as compared to Rush and Depp squaring off in even the slightest ways. If the screenwriters had figured out a way to develp their story by doing rather than saying, the film would have been great. For instance, the opening with Barbossa and Elizabeth talking to Sao Feng, would have been better if they instead showed Will and the lot trying to steal the charts they were after. It's a simple writing rule, show don't tell. But, the film gets on to showing eventually enough, and that's when the film picks up. The third act is a wonder to behold and the resolution to the three films' dominant storyline wraps up much more satisfactorally than you'd anticpate, even if you do predict it. Overall, if you like the first two films, I can't imagine being put off too much by the third. I'd just suggest seeing it at a reasonable time of the day so fatigue doesn't get the better of you.

#6 of 10 OFFLINE   Dome Vongvises

Dome Vongvises

    Lead Actor

  • 8,174 posts
  • Join Date: May 13 2001

Posted May 25 2007 - 09:52 AM

I'm liking this one, and it turned the tide for some awful letdowns as far as I'm concerned.

But it doesn't have quite the excitement as the other two films. But as far as the funny bits are concerned, I laughed quite a bit. I must be the target audience. Posted Image


#7 of 10 OFFLINE   Michael:M


    Supporting Actor

  • 530 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 27 2006

Posted May 25 2007 - 10:19 AM

I pretty much agree with Chuck and Tim. It's not a total loss, but I don't think it's as good as either of the earlier films. I'm a HUGE fan of DMC, and while this film amplifies that film's strengths, it does the same with the weakenesses. Geoffrey Rush owns this movie, though, with Bill Nighy close behind. Both do fantastic work in what ought to be cartoon characters, managing to infuse them with some depth and texture. Chuck, I own the score. Totally worth it. Not quite as all-out kickass as DMC, but it's very good. Without spoiling any specific scenes, one of the things I admire about the film is that, for a Disney movie with a gargantuan budget, it takes a lot of chances and does not play things safe. Jack becomes even wierder, for example, and it's done in ways that are sure to confuse many a Joe and Jane Sixpack. I'm also going to see it again. I have a feeling it's better than my initial impressions say it is, but I can watch it better now without my expectations on what "should" happen.
"Life began in mystery, and it will end in mystery, but what a savage and beautiful country lies in between." - Diane Ackerman

#8 of 10 OFFLINE   Chris Atkins

Chris Atkins


  • 3,887 posts
  • Join Date: May 09 2002

Posted May 27 2007 - 04:31 PM

6/10 Too busy, just like Spidey 3, and once again they introduce major plot elements in the beginning that drive our characters for much of the film. In DMC, we were told (not shown) that Jack owed Davey Jones a debt of service, and that drove the plot of the film. But that was more forgiveable than what happens at the beginning of AWE, where we are once again told (not shown) that there are nine pirate captains on this board, and they need to meet to decide what to do, and this element of the plot drives at least the first half of AWE. It is less forgiveable in AWE because this film already had its own plot established back in DMC. I just can't understand why they felt the need to introduce new elements here. Ratings of all the pirate movies: POTC: Curse of the Black Pearl: 9/10 POTC: Dead Man's Chest: 7/10 POTC: At World's End: 6/10

#9 of 10 OFFLINE   nickGreenwood


    Second Unit

  • 494 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 13 2004

Posted May 28 2007 - 02:48 PM

I liked this one far more than I liked DMC, but I hated the second one so my expectations for this movie were low, which probably helped out. Some thoughts: Keith Richards looked a lot like Captain Hook but was completely awesome in his limited role. Davy Jones really annoys me and takes me out of the movie nearly every time he's on screen. Geoff Rush really does steal the movie. Johnny was at the top of his game in this one, he seemed more into it. Despite its running time I was engrossed in the whole movie and I didn't even want to see it. Overall I really liked this one, it sets up a 4th if they want to do one. Its not as strong as the first one, the first Pirates had a concise, somewhat realistic story. I went at 5 today and the theater was pretty empty, but it was a beautiful day out so that probably killed a lot of theater going in general.
-Nick G.

"The number of people whose permission I need before I can do whatever the hell I want..." - Josh Lyman

#10 of 10 OFFLINE   Paul Case

Paul Case

    Supporting Actor

  • 532 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 05 2002

Posted May 28 2007 - 04:02 PM

In short, my wife and I both loved it. I was pleasantly surprised because I despised DMC with a passion. It was a supreme let down for me after the joyous surprise of Curse of the Black Pearl, so I went into AWE with extremely low expectations. Even given that fact, though, I was inordinately pleased with this third film. Was it too long? Obviously. Was it too talky in places? Absolutely. But was it F-U-N? Without a doubt! The film never lost me for a moment. Even when the critical part of me was picking apart the film, the rest of me just smacked it down, munched popcorn, slurped soda and went along for the ride. The characterizations were back on form here and that makes all of the difference. Depp is a joy again as Jack and Rush is absolutely his equal. I didn't realize it until after I watched this film, but Rush's Barbossa is every bit as crucial to this franchise as Depp's Jack. That's probably half the reason why I still think DMC is trash (although the piss poor writing, direction, "humor" and off key characterizations are more than enough).

Oh, and if nothing else, this film is superior to DMC because of Keith Richards' cameo. Yes, he's that good. I'd kill to get a film of the adventures of Captains Teague and Jack Sparrow. Screw the mythological, supernatural elements. Just give me an Indy Jones style pirate adventure with those two and I'd be happy as a clam.

All in all, I'd say that as a third film in a trilogy, this clearly bests Matrix: Revolutions (duh), Return of the King (due to a significant lack of crying, pillow fights and overdone, interminable and, yes, tearful endings) and Spidey 3 (duh again).

Anyway, I don't want to sound too gushy - the film has its problems. If you didn't like the first Pirates film, you'll despise this one. However, if you are a disgruntled Pirates fan who was put off by the swill you found in the rum bottle of DMC, come on back and take a swig from AWE. I guarantee you'll stop asking why the rum is gone. Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image out of Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image

PS: The score is excellent. Buy it even if you don't want to see the film.

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users