Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End (2007) (1 Viewer)

[CoreyII]

Yeah, I most definitely agree. Peter Jackson's King Kong is a perfect example of good material and good pacing, although something tells me I'm probably alone in that opinion. Oh well.

 

[TravisR]

Yeah, I guess I misspoke. When a movie drones on and on, it is a pacing issue. CoreyII's example of King Kong is a perfect example of a long movie that 'earns' its long run time and seems much shorter than alot of 2 hour comedies that feel 6 years long.

 

[Joe D]

The first film felt 10 minutes too long.

The second film felt about 60 minutes too long.

Too bad about the third.

Peter Jackson's King Kong isn't a movie I would pick that was "worth" its 3 hour run time. There was probably 90 minutes of bloated material in there.

Now another Jackson film, Fellowship of the Ring, now that's a great "long" movie with great pacing.

 

[Pete-D]

I have to give it to James Cameron on the pacing thing ... there's no way Titanic makes even half that if people were looking at their watches in the theater.

Terminator 2 is also pretty long by action film standards, but I never heard any complaints when it was first in theaters.

Peter Jackson got away with the length in LOTR even though I think he really started to strain people's patience by the time ROTK came out.

King Kong was just too much.

 

[Brent M]

I totally agree. King Kong felt like one of the longest movies I've ever seen and I can only hope At World's End doesn't drag on the way it did.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

Cameron is a master at pacing. Titanic is a fricking swiss watch.

I love Kong, but I agree the pacing was a bit off. It need about 15 minutes gone, and all from the first half. I still love me some Kong though.

Pirates 2 did overstay it's welcome a little bit. Subsequent viewings are where pacing really shows, in all films. I'd rather a film was a little long than a little short.

 

[Michael:M]

The only place DMC slows down for me is on Cannibal Island. It's a lot of fun, but could be tightened up a lot. I love the rest, and love how full the film is. However, your comment about preferring too long over too short brought The Fountain to mind; these days, I'd almost leave the theater wanting more rather than feeling like I ate a bit too much. The Fountain could have certainly been much longer, but part of its beauty is its brevity. I know that was forced onto the project, but in this case that forced economy really served the story.

Having said that, I'm looking forward to all 165 minutes of AWE tonight!

 

[CoreyII]

Considering how many kids like Pirates of the Caribbean, I think ultimately it's going to be the film's length that will hurt "At Worlds End".

Like the "Matrix Reloaded", I think "Dead Man's Chest" cruised on borrowed credit from it's predecessor, "At World's End" won't have that luxury.

Of the three big threequels that have come out in May 07, I think "Spidey 3" will end up grossing the most money.

 

[Tim Glover]

Just got back from the 8pm premiere. Not too good....

Big disappointment. :frowning:

 

[Patrick Sun]

Just wanted to remind folks to stay to the very end of the credits for an extra scene. (Not sure if all will feel it's worth it to sit through another 10 minutes of credits, but at least you'll know and have the choice).

 

[Tim Glover]

We left as fast as we could. Felt like our World Would End if we didn't.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Everything you like from the first two movies is back, only more convoluted and at the same time diluted. Fantastic opening sequence, but the film tanked as soon as we cut to Jack. Lots of wonderful moments scattered throughout, but a long, dreary slog for the most part.

 

[Lou Sytsma]

Confirms my deductions. Gladly skipping this one. S3 was bad enough.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

I also missed the "zinger" scene. It was late, the movie was pedestrian, and I wanted to get home.

There are parts that would be fun to discuss, but almost none of them story or character related. I'm sure most of us had our own personal nadirs, but mine was Swann's "Braveheart" moment. In a movie that played far too many scenes silly when they would be more effective straight (there is that whole balance thing again), that was one scene that should NOT have been played straight.

In a major missed opportunity (spoilers) after that:
Once the Flying Dutchman has been lost to the vortex, and the Pearl stands against the armada (which, like the Pirate fleet, does NOTHING), I was waiting for the Dutchman to suddenly appear and attack Beckett's ship after the battle had commenced. But the filmmakers gave us a 10 second reappear for the Dutchman, and a half minute for the audience to figure it out, including a shot of the crew, and even allowed Will to make the order so the audience could hear it - it lost all dramatic tension when they spelled it out in crayon before anything happened. Too bad...it was well set up for such a turnabout.
It just felt like a product. There were several genuine moments throughout, but the overall effect felt like a hard sell, which I loathe. They barely had two hours of material, yet managed to find 45 MORE minutes to pad it out. Looking back, there were whole scenes that were worthless.

Oh well. Every other reviewer mentioned that their audience loved it, as did mine. So it should do just fine. But it's a disappointment to me.

 

[Shawn.F]

It felt like watching 1,000 traffic accidents...all at once.

The movie is a convoluted mess (I saw it a few days ago and I am still trying to sort out who crossed who) and it goes on for the length of a bible, but it was oddly compelling. I think it was compelling in the sense that I was curious as to what they would throw up on screen next to make the movie go on longer. I enjoyed Depp in this film as well as Geoffrey Rush (Bloom and Knightley? Zzzzz!) and the visuals were terrific, but what the hell was up with the script? There was no reason for it to be that confusing. Tell a simple, straightforward story. Good guys on one side, bad on the other.

Of the three big films this May, this was the one I liked the most (I thought Shrek and Spidey were pretty dismal). But that really isn't saying much. Sigh.

PS-Keith Richards' cameo was great.

 

[Cory S.]

Of the big there films this May, At World's End is definitely the best, even if the script is a complete mess.

As Shawn stated above, it's just oddly compelling and it entertains the crap out of you. And the funny thing about the film is that if you really sit down and think about it, it really only has two action sequences throughout it's running time.

Unlike Spider-Man 3 which had an action sequence probably every twenty minutes, this thing is really all about set up to the grande finale, and I guess I was more forgiving towards it because it was overly ambitious in what it was trying to do, in terms of plot and story arc for Will and Elizabeth.

Unlike most third films in a trilogy in recent memory, this film is actually larger and smaller at the same time...if you get what I mean. I mean, it doesn't balloon out of shape like Spider-Man 3, The Matrix Revolutions (still love the film) and Return of the King did.

But, more importantly, unlike Spider-Man 3, At World's End keeps that same tone that we find in the first two films....hence the reason why it doesn't feel out of place or too big for it's britches, even though it actually is.

As it stands, had the last two films given more time to develop their scripts, Dead Man's Chest and At World's End could've been much, much better than they are. Still, they're ambitious as hell and definitely try to entertain you without reservation.

The final resolution to the Will and Elizabeth arc is a gutsy and ballsy move by Verbinski and the screenwriters. It elevated the three films to something a bit more with this resolution.

 

[DavidPla]

I won't be able to see the film for a while so I was wondering if anyone can answer me this question without spoiling it. Do we get to see some kind of Land of the Dead in this film?

 

[gushin]

I enjoyed the movie a little more than most around here so far. My only complaint was its length and few really unnecesarry gross out scenes. Here' a question for those who saw it:Other than telling the pirates when to convene to form the brethren court, was there any other significance to the silver coins? I thought that was what the pirates would put in the bowl when they convened.

 

[Cory S.]

David,

Yes...

 

[cudakite]

cool. Thanks for the reviews Cory and Shawn.