I went to see the second Pirates of the Caribbean movie, and it was pretty good. I just didn't like how the ending made it so you have to go see the third movie to get the rest of the story. The first movie ended like it was a single movie, and I wish that this one would have the same sense of closure, instead of demanding for another six dollars.
I would rate it 4 stars.
EDIT: It is out of 5 stars.
I want to see it so bad! Terry Rossio and Ted Elliot are the two screenwriters I admire the most. In fact, www.screenplayer.com could be a good reference to any adventure game plot creator. Anyway, I'm a bit surprised you'd give it only four starts, according to the hype it'd be worth five and a half! The first one was, imho, one of the best movies ever. There was just something catchy about it all.
And: you are lucky to pay only six dollars, it's 7-9 euros in here!
My opinions: Overall the first one was better than the second, but select parts of the second were better than any part of the first. Overall, the second half of the second was better than the first half of the second, but select parts of the first half were better than very nearly any part of the second half.
Just dropping in to point out the obvious.
Quote from: TheCheese33 on Sat 08/07/2006 23:03:18
I would rate it 4 stars.
That rating of yours doesn't make any sense if you don't say out of how many stars you rated. You may want to add that.
Quote from: dkh on Sat 08/07/2006 23:27:40
Just dropping in to point out the obvious.
Quote from: TheCheese33 on Sat 08/07/2006 23:03:18
I would rate it 4 stars.
That rating of yours doesn't make any sense if you don't say out of how many stars you rated. You may want to add that.
Quote from: TheCheese33 on Sat 08/07/2006 23:03:18I would rate it 4 out of 3 stars!
I liked the movie. I thought the ending was cool. It promises another movie...which is good for me. I was fairly certain there wouldn't be one until the end.
It was quite funnier than the first IMO. I would recommend it.
The fact that the third film has already been filmed pretty much guaranteed its existence...
Well, it hasn't been completely filmed. They are continuing in a few months. Depp is a busy guy, and Keith Richards in finally available to play his daddy.
I did think this installment was funnier, and it had more references to the ride. And I can't wait to see how putting Keith Richards into the film series will turn out. I remember everyone thinking that he was going to be in the second film, a year before this one was released.
Spoiler
But how are they going to explain how Barbossa is still alive, when he was killed in the first movie? And why is that monkey still undead? I thought that when the curse was lifted in the first film, everyone was returned to a mortal state. I just hope they'll be able to make resolutions in the film as easy as they can make story branches, because this film left a hell of a lot of loose ends to tie up.
Also,
Spoiler
I loved the fight scene on the waterwheel. It was so well-done, and it was really cool to see them reacting to it spinning round and round. It was my favorite scene in the movie. Props to whoever came up with the idea for it!
Can't wait for #3! ;D
I found the movie was enjoyable, my only complaint really is its length. Mainly because I didn't get home till real late, after seeing it.
-MillsJROSS
I think it was a lot weaker than the first movie (which I consider among the best movies I've seen), although I agree that some parts of it were hilarious. Overall, however, I'd say it's 3 out of 5. This one is very long, with a *lot* of unnecessary special effects.
Spoiler
The sea monster was a cool idea, but in the end they overdid it and became boring. I think less (and less intense) fighting and screaming would've made for a lot better movie.
I also thought that the characters (including Jack Sparrow) were a lot like cardboard figures, not as witty and lively as in the first movie, maybe because of the weaker story. I didn't feel this one had a well thought-out storyline. They tried to put loads of twists into the story - again less would've been more.
I'm a bit disappointed, because I eagerly awaited this one, but I may go and see the third movie, too.
Ugh. I hate this recent trend of long movies. It may have not been much longer than the first one, but I was very aware of its length throughout.
To me, it felt like the Matrix Reloaded, a meandering (needless) sequel which never really manages to stand on its own feet. A lot of the same jokes (or references to them) were present. It feels kind of cheap to assume that the 3rd movie will fill all the plot holes.
Orlando Bloom's character really pissed me off, with his one dimensional personality. He never shows fear or weakness, so he loses credibility with a human audience. I would say all the character's were flat, except for Jack.
Was the voodoo lady in her stilted house on the river copied from MI?
Wasnt one of the main influences for the first one Monkey Island as well as the ride?
MI was inspired by the ride, but I don't think there was a voodoo lady in the ride.
Did the crew of Flying Dutchman make anyone else crave kalamari? Tempura? I know I left the theater with a hankering for sushi.
Voodoo is a very predominant theme in the Caribbean...I doubt they took the idea from MI.
Personally, I didn't like this movie too much. It was all right, but I've seen better. The jokes were overdone and didn't get me to laugh once (the only time I DID laugh was when Jack Sparrow ran right into a pole, haha.) I don't know, I guess it's just not my kind of movie, and more like my friends' kind of movie, since they enjoyed it.
I like long movies. I think we should bring back intermissions in American theaters, though.
Quote from: Stickieee on Sat 08/07/2006 23:18:03In fact, www.screenplayer.com could be a good reference to any adventure game plot creator.
I believe you mean www.wordplayer.com. More specific, the "Columns" section is pure gold for storytellers in any media. Too bad Ted & Terry seem to have stopped writing them.
If you want to know how Barbossa and the monkey are still alive
Watch the end of the first movie to see:
Spoiler
the monkey take back an aztec gold and runs at the camera. It's quite possible the monkey put another gold on barbossa's dying hand.
And be sure to wait for the end of the long, long credits to see a humourous scene.
I would say that the film was enjoyable to watch, but the obvious LOOK WE ARE SETTING UP FOR A SEQUEL was overdone, unecessary as probably every bloody person will go and see it anyway, and gave no sense of closure to the film which I despise as cliffhangers do not keep me hooked, simply annoy.
It was fun to watch, but Orlando Bloom and Keira Knightly were more annoying than ever.Ã, I hope the third film (which I will inevitably end up seeing due to the large amount of Johnny Depp/pirate obsessed friends I have) will sort itself out, otherwise I may have to ignore these films and think of PotC as the first film alone.
Why? Why? Why?
Why do people do this? A nice complete movie, and then they spoil it with a sequel. And not even a good sequel. Instead of coming up with semi-original material, they re-use old stuff, old characters, just there because people liked 'em in the first one. References to old jokes, re-use old "tricks" and old ideas. Like in Monkey Island:
1- Hey! Insult sword fighting. What a novel idea!
2- Completely different stuff, new characters, islands, original and enjoyable (Because this was actually planned properly! Except the ending, perhaps ¬¬)
3- Insult sword-fighting again! But with rhyming couplets. Hmmmm...
4- Insult arm-wrestling? Insult monkey-fighting? What were they thinking?
Whew....sorry. Haven't seen it yet, but I'll probably watch it anyway* .
* And THAT'S what those money hungry idiots feed off. The "I liked the first, so I'll probably go see this too" attitude.
Quote"I liked the first, so I'll probably go see this too" attitude.
Isn't this so, though? Aren't people getting all worked up every time a new 'Monkey Island sequel' comes out or a Broken Sword game that they know will not be as good, instead of pushing for new ideas that don't necessarily make for sequel-aplenty franchises?
Anyone else notice Norrington looks exactly like Guybrush in MI2?
The beginning is slow, Barbossa's reveal is terrible, and it's not even close to being as clever as the first, but it's a decent movie. Gotta love Bill Nighy.
Quote from: HelmIsn't this so, though? Aren't people getting all worked up every time a new 'Monkey Island sequel' comes out or a Broken Sword game that they know will not be as good, instead of pushing for new ideas that don't necessarily make for sequel-aplenty franchises?
I think you're right. It's the publishers' job to get as much IP in the game or movie as they can, as many top-search and/or buzz words. It just makes the marketing part easier. And it's the game designer's job to make it original despite of thisÃ, Ã, ::)Ã, - A fact that will sometimes make me visit www.manifestogames.com to have a pleasant backdrop for my fits of denial.
In a way, brands make sense, I mean I'm pretty sure I get quality when I buy, say a new Sid Meier's "something"- game, problem is when only the IP survives to the sequel, and none of the creators and none of Ã, the original atmosphere - not that I've really experienced this with the Sid Meier brand so far.
Seems some people forget/don't care that what makes stuff fun or interesting isn't the stuff itself, isolated from eveything else, but the fact that it's... well, new to its context. Ron Gilbert mentioned this, sort of, in the recently posted podcast here, when he said comedy is hard because it's all about timing. Publishing certainly is as well.Ã, Perhaps making people think back and "remember" the prequel is just another way of mastering timing.
I thiknk the third one will be better, just because as I was watching it, I realised how much I missed Barbossa. Then he came back at the end, haha.
My complaint is that it just didn't flow as well as the first one. It felt very stilted, with many "little" scenes, and not enough character development. The only character I thought that actually evolved a bit from the first one was Elizabeth (Keira), who became more piratey.
I did like the fact that my favourite characters, the two "idiot" pirates (Gareth from the Office and the other one) and Captain Norrington (The guy from Coupling) were both in it more. But I found that the overall feel of the film just wasn't as magical as the first. Though I do admit, the wheel scene was well done.
It all boils down to this: I saw the first movie twice in the theatres and bought it the day it came out on DVD. The second one, I'll probably wait until it goes on the "Previously Viewed" shelf at Blockbuster before I buy it.
Quote from: big brother on Sun 09/07/2006 17:25:05
MI was inspired by the ride, but I don't think there was a voodoo lady in the ride.
Apparently according to Ron Gilbert, MI is strongly based on the book, On Stranger Tides by Tim Powers, can't say I've read it though.
I want to go see POTC 2, but its just a matter of when I can be bothered to stop trying to get a decent score on SSB Sandbag Batting and leave the house.
On Stranger Tides was an amazing read and I wholly impose on you all to read it. Especially you, Edmundo...
Quote from: Redwall on Mon 10/07/2006 16:28:42Anyone else notice Norrington looks exactly like Guybrush in MI2?
Funny, I thought the same thing about Will Turner. And what's up with the coffins as rowboats and voodoo ladies in swamps? Someone in the screenplay department has surely played MI2. I really hope the third movie will feature more of that creepy prison place that Jack Sparrow escapes from in the beginning of the movie - it looked amazing (and reminded me quite a bit of Simon the Sorcerer 2).
Did anyone else think that the scene where the two guys on the ship that find Jack's hat was more than a little similar to the scene in MI3 where the two guys on the ship find LeChuck's boots? :)
You're right it wasn't half bad - it was all bad! (Nah, I'm pulling your leg it was only 3/4 bad, i was just channeling some of "Waldorf and Statler" on that one)
No one like a hearing lecture, but sequels, in film, are mostly bad. There are a handful of great ones like The Godfather part 2, Terminator 2, Empire Strikes Back, Mighty Ducks 2, but generally they suck.
Why does this Pirates 2 stink, let me count the ways:
Pacing: First off, it's too damn long. A length is great, when the story is strong, see Berlin Alexanderplatz, but when the story is sketchy, you start to feel the time weighing down on you. It was fast then slow then stopped then fast then stopped. It needed some build up and something to build towards.
Storytelling: In a story as linear as this, the surprise ending is pretty much given away near the beginning, to those who've watched the first one and were paying attention. There was a whole lot of content in this movie that goes unexplained and with 2 and 1/2 hours to work with they could have done something about that. Yes, I understand it's for suspence but there's a difference from suspence and poor storytelling.
Deus Ex Machina: I'm not a fan of this device. It makes whatever it touches seem like a build up to nothing. Lots of the people that were in the theatre with me did the whole "ooohhh, aaaahhh" thing when the ending came up. I wasn't surprised, this is the sort of thing Disney pulls often
Spoiler
(Tell me, when was the last time in a Disney movie did a main character die and stay dead, Bambi's mom doesn't count.)
Acting: The reason why the above sequels are good is that the characters that we know and love get more developped, they become more human and therefore more relatable. In this movie the characters are exactly the same like nothing happened in the last movie. There are exceptions as always: Bootstrap Bill has grown up a bit among others in the secondary cast. If I wanted the same gags, the same people - the same everything, I'll pop in my dvd of the first one and re-watch it.
Having said all that, The movie does have some good points, the special effects are pretty nice looking, the action is fast paced, though the fight scenes do run a little long, the comedy is mostly okay, the film is decent but not clever and I was hoping for alot more.
Quotethe film is decent but not clever and I was hoping for alot more.
And therein lies your problem. Expectations cloud our judgement about whether or not a movie will be good or not. You came with high hopes, and not everything met your criteria. I'd argue you won't really know how you feel about the movie till you see it much later, when there isn't so much hype, and you know what to expect. I agree with most of your assertions, but I knew it wasn't going to be as good as the first, so I enjoyed it more.
And if you want to complain about length of movies, look at Superman Returns. I've never been so bored in my life.
-MillsJROSS
To be honest, I absolutely loved it.
Why?
1. Jack is still his goofy ass selfHonestly, he stole the show over and over again with his utter randomness ("Look," BANG, "An undead monkey.")
And I especially loved the way he broke out of the prison. You just sit there wondering "Why the hell are we looking at a coffin?" the bird starts pecking at it, you think "Oh, that's kind of screwed up." and then you hear a bang and Jack breaks open the coffin. The morbid humor was great.
2. Good Fight Scenes The fight scenes WERE a little overdone, but they were still very amusing (especially the waterwheel)
3. Plot Twists There were quite a few of these, but I liked how they played out. The only thing I felt was out of place was the woman, but hey, it's their movie, not mine.
4. Scare Factor Well, it wasn't really scary, but the cannibals freaked me out the way they jumped out and grabbed Will Turner, the flat wussy.
5. The Cliffhanger Spoiler
Actually, I'm happy to see Barbosa back, and it'll be very interesting to see him team up with the crew of the Black Pearl, but his return was just an utter shok (but a perfec tplace to end the second movie.
Besides which, for a second movie, it was very good. Lots of second movies suck. The third one will be better, I hope. But hey, I had fun. ;D
The "Ask a Ninja" guy does a review of this movie... rather funny:
http://www.askaninja.com/tags/pirates
After watching a few of his video clips, this "Ninja" guy sort of grows on ya after a while (in a "it's so silly it's funny" kinda way) . :=
Quote from: Barbarian on Thu 13/07/2006 08:22:30
The "Ask a Ninja" guy does a review of this movie... rather funny:
http://www.askaninja.com/tags/pirates
After watching a few of his video clips, this "Ninja" guy sort of grows on ya after a while (in a "it's so silly it's funny" kinda way) . :=
I really got into "Ask a Ninja" a few months ago, just about every episode has made me laugh.
QuoteAnd I especially loved the way he broke out of the prison. You just sit there wondering "Why the hell are we looking at a coffin?" the bird starts pecking at it, you think "Oh, that's kind of screwed up." and then you hear a bang and Jack breaks open the coffin. The morbid humor was great.
I thought it was very obvious what was about to happen?
The "An undead monkey!" bit was good though. As was "I happen to have no dress in my cabin..."
I went and saw it today. It was long, but I loved it.
I thought the first scene with the kraken attacking the trader ship was awesome, kinda terrifying. Especially with the pipe organ music in the background.
The pirates in Davy Jones' crew were cool, too. I loved the character designs. I think I might actually pay to see a spin-off about Davy Jones and his crew.
But, yeah. My major gripe was that I have to wait to find out how Sparrow is going to settle his debt with Davy Jones. When I heard it was going to be a trilogy, I thought it was going to be 3 separate movies. Instead, they decided to try and turn it into this huge pirate epic (a-la LOTR, and Star Wars). At least when I saw the first movie, I was content with the ending.
Ace movie, very piratey. Loved it, made me pee.
Quote from: MillsJROSS on Thu 13/07/2006 04:13:26
And if you want to complain about length of movies, look at Superman Returns. I've never been so bored in my life.
-MillsJROSS
See, I absolutely loved Superman Returns. I didn't think it was too long at all. Pirates 2, however was a bit too long in my opinion. It all depends on whether the movie can interest you right away. I remember coming out of the theatre and turning to my girlfriend who had the same look on her face as me. It was a kinda "I liked Pirates 2, so why do I kinda feel like I wasted my time?". We both agreed later on that evening that Superman was better.
It was the awesome.
The pacing in Superman was too perfect. It was so well done the movie seemed to short. I wanted MORE!
I have yet to see Pirates, but I am getting excited. Screw the critics, I form opinions all by myself. Right?
I want to see it because I liked the first movie. I LOVED it, actually... It would surprise me a lot if I don't like this part two, maybe not that much as first part (The scene where Jack arrives Port Royale is IMO the best scene ever...) but I am sure I' ll enjoy this.
Now I must ask... What happen to you guys? Most of you loved part 1... Why was it supperb and part 2 simply sucks? Is it that after seeing POTC in blockbuster it is "dirty" or something? Is it now an "example of prostitution of the 7th art to the capitalism" or what? Maybe it is... But with that rule of 3, part one was another example as well... :P
I don't really understant why this fashion of criticising something simply because you "percieve it's cool to do it..." Man, the other day I was at the queue of Superman and I was hearing a guys comment "Yes, it's going to be a crap!" (Man... If you thing it's going to be crap, what are you doing here???)
I am not really criticising people who has seen it, says "I preffered part one" or "The pace was not supperb, I would have cut 20 minutes" That's ok... I also was disspointed with "the phantom menace" and Matrix II and III. What really disturb me is that that there is people who is criticising without seeing it... Hyposcrisy sucks. Not directly to anyone of the forums members... just thinking aloud. :)
I agree.. It seems to be a trend to slam every movie that hits the box office. Are movies getting worse, or is the average viewer becoming more pretentious?
Well let me tell you something... American blockbuster movies suck. I havn't been to the cinema in ages becouse I've seen the same crap again and again. It's allways the fireworks and no plot.
Hollywood's principal is simple: If by some kind of stupid rare luck you manage to make a good movie, poo over its name and make easy money with a silly sequel.
I liked Star Wars... and they killed it for me.
I liked Terminator too... untill he got older and started WW3.
I loved the first Matrix... And then it got all epic, shiny and pointless.
I loved Pirates of The Carribian... Im not ever going to pay a dime for dumb sequels.
Quote from: Krysis on Mon 17/07/2006 21:14:07
I loved Pirates of The Carribian... Im not ever going to pay a dime for dumb sequels.
Which totally enters in the ambience of your freedom of decission, Krysis... But there are people who pees over that right of "not going to see it" They go, they secretelly love it, but they ruin it to the mythomaniacs who would really enjoy it, and after that they like to boast about how cool they are for criticising POTC 2. That's being hypocrital.
We're totally talking about different things. I admire your decission of "not going to see it". I admire those who really find good crits after seeing the film with a positivie attitude. But I just can't understand criticising without seeing it, because "it seems it's the reasonable thing to do".
Remember Titanic? It was, IMO, one of the most touching film in decades... maybe a bit slow at the beginning. I DARED to tell to my friends that it was a bit slow at the beginning. They allmost killed me. Then it won 11 oscars. I bought it in video. When that friends (The same who almost killed me for criticising it 6 months ago) saw that I had it in video, they almost killed me, because Titanic was "for sissies, with DiCapry, who sucks, and Kate Winslett, who is a fat whale bitch". Why this change?
I hated SW episode one, specially Jar Jar... But man, if you are a mythomaniac, Episode I and II are worth if they conduct to the minute where Darth Vader awakes. And if the "rumour" that "all the saga sucks now!" spoils it somehow. I didn't liked Matrix II and III... But I still like part I. I can't understand how "a sequel released in cinemas" can ruin enjoying the experience of seeing the original movie in a DVD at home. They are different movies! Actually... I think that if you go with the "feeling" that the sequel it's going to kill all the saga... it probably will!
So, people... Relax.
See you in this very topic when Indy IV is announced.
Just wanted to say I saw it tonight and quite enjoyed it! Bit too much Depp, bit too long - but other than that it was still very entertaining. A few chucklesome moments, but in honesty - the new Steven Segal Orange advert had my sides splitting - but I guess only because I was wondering about him the other day :)
Quote from: Nacho on Mon 17/07/2006 22:06:40
Remember Titanic? It was, IMO, one of the most touching film in decades... maybe a bit slow at the beginning. I DARED to tell to my friends that it was a bit slow at the beginning. They allmost killed me. Then it won 11 oscars. I bought it in video. When that friends (The same who almost killed me for criticising it 6 months ago) saw that I had it in video, they almost killed me, because Titanic was "for sissies, with DiCapry, who sucks, and Kate Winslett, who is a fat whale bitch". Why this change?
It's the backlash sydrome. It happens when anything becomes too popular. Take the Bee Gees in the 70s for example. When Saturday Night Fever came out, the Bee Gees became super famous globally. They released a string of albums with tons of great songs on them. But then they became too popular, and all the sudden it was "cool" to hate the Bee Gees. Radio stations started having "Bee Gee Free Weekends" and the like.
I saw it happen again with the film Napoleon Dynamite. A few of my friends who had seen it in the theatre absolutely loved it. But when it got released on DVD, and became extremely popular, a couple of my friends started slagging it. It annoys me how people can change their opinion on something because of it's popularity. But of course, it's going to happen.
Back on topic, I liked Pirates 2. I had high expectations, since the first one was bloody brilliant in my opinion, and the second film ALMOST met my expectations. So I thought it was pretty good. I'm not going to outright hate it because everyone else loves it, nor am I going to love it because everyone else hates it. It was a good film with some great moments, regardless of how much money it's made.
It can happen in just a few months. Vanilla Ice was actually popular once.
Quote from: BerserkerTails on Tue 18/07/2006 02:52:23
It annoys me how people can change their opinion on something because of it's popularity.
I think it's because people don't know how to think for themselves, and it's too easy to give in to pop culture's subliminal messages.
Quote from: TheCheese33 on Sun 09/07/2006 01:46:02
I can't wait to see how putting Keith Richards into the film series will turn out.
I suppose Richards will make a fine "Papa Sparrow", given his history of drugs and booze, and his odd slur when he talks. I don't know if he's done any other movies, but I would have thought his big screen debut would have been a cameo in one of Romero's Dead films as a zombie (he already looks like a corpse, so why not?... :P).
As far as my own annoyance goes - considering that I haven't even seen the movie yet - the reason is that I cannot imagine any other way the movie began than this way:
"Hey, people liked Pirates of the Caribbean, and it made a lot of money! We'd be fools to throw this away, lets make a sequel! Since people liked the first movie, we'll try to keep it the same! We'll have those two silly pirates make an appearance again, and perhaps even those two funny soldiers, and the monkey! People will like that. We'll make gag references to the 1st movie, and since people liked the fight in the Blacksmith's shop, we'll have something like that! (and try not to have too much new stuff, we might miss, and people won't like that!)
Meh...I'll probably go see it anyway, and I might even be proved wrong, in which case it is better than going to watch it with very high expectations and have them fall.
I liked the fact it plays off the first one... Simply because I hate it when sequels completely forget their originals. There's some gags and happenings in POTC2 that are funny because of whats happened in the first one. I'd suggest watching the first one again, even if you've seen it 1000 times already just before you see this one, then it will seem like a direct continuation. There are moments in POTC which will remind you of Monkey Island, too! Which was nice :)
Indy 1 was ok...
Indy 2 was totally different... No nazis, no stuff related with the bible, no deserts... even Indy had no gun! People said it totally sucked.
Indy 3 recovers the spirit of the first movie... Deserts, Nazis, Sallah, Bible stuff....
And people said it sucked because it was a rip off of the first one.
Ergo, people will never be happy.
Well I saw it and I got what I expected - heartful swashbuckling adventure. Yes, a bit too long, I was restless in my seat a couple of times, but nothing major. 3 out of 5 :=
Monkey Island is Amazing
I give it a 3/5, as well.
It was an interesting movie, and I can see how some people thought it was better and how others thought it was worse than the first one, but I think that the first one was a bit better.
The first one had a better storyline, I think. The second one had a good storyline, too, but the new characters introduced didn't seem to live up to the ones from the first film, and the ones who made a reappearance didn't seem like their old selves.
Overall, I give it a 3/5,
I'll give it 4 out of 5 as well.
It is true that 90% of sequels suck really bad and are nothing but money grubbing (The Lion King III, Ocean's Fifteen, I Am Entirely Aware Of What You Did Last Summer, etc). However, the remaining 10% of sequels are well worth it, and this is one of them.
Quote from: Radiant on Wed 26/07/2006 08:21:58
It is true that 90% of sequels suck really bad and are nothing but money grubbing (The Lion King III, Ocean's Fifteen, I Am Entirely Aware Of What You Did Last Summer, etc).
LOL
I agree entirely. ^_^
Quote
It is true that 90% of sequels suck really bad and are nothing but money grubbing
I'm sorry, but I'd say 99.99% of all sequels are money grubbing. This move included. It doesn't mean that the movie is bad, it just means that those who produce movies see what the audience likes and make more of it. I'd actually say, most of the originals are money grubbing, too. Movies are a business, they are there to make money. People read scripts, say, "That one will make us money!" And then a movie is made.
-MillsJROSS
Man, I went to the bookshop and realised that all the publishers were only printing books so they could sell them and try to make money. Horrified at this CRASS COMMERICIALISM I went to the cinema, only to see more CAPITALIST motivated films. So I bought a CD, which was nothing but a RENT SEEKING exercise by a studio that wasn't altruistically distributing music at all!
So I decided to read fan fiction on the internet, listen to garage bands on Myspace and watch home videos on youtube. All else is MONEY GRUBBING.
All the world's a store, and all the men and women merely payers...
I liked Terminator 2
QuoteIt can happen in just a few months. Vanilla Ice was actually popular once.
It's his own damn fault for being in Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 2: Secret of the Ooze.
Also, I haven't seen Pirates 2 yet but I enjoyed the original in spite of detesting Orlando Bloom's one-dimensional prettyboy-ness, so when it comes out on dvd I shall endeavor to see it.
I do find it problematic for the story that stealing the Aztec gold could save Barbossa from an encounter with a scimitar through the chest when he was human, but I suppose if he stole it while somehow still alive and ran away it could 'sustain' him until the gold is taken away...Then he should just flop over again, logically.
Quote from: ProgZmax on Thu 27/07/2006 10:10:54
until the gold is taken away...Then he should just flop over again, logically.
Maybe I didn't understand you, but when the gold was taken away from Barbossa and returned to the chest, he DID flop over and die.
No, iirc Barbossa was returned to mortal form at which point Jack ran him through. Now if he somehow got a piece of the gold before dying (which seems to be the case) I suppose that the curse sustains him, but he's essentially in a state of suspended death now (and wasn't before, since he acquired the curse initially while alive (and not suffering fatal injuries I'm guessing).
This also depends on what the curse actually does when lifted. Does it return people to perfect health in spite of anything that happened to them before the curse, or does it return them to their state just prior to the curse? We know only this from the film: it ignores injuries that occur while cursed, since the crew of the Pearl and Barbossa didn't drop dead after it was lifted from the multitude of injuries suffered while cursed. These questions and more will probably not be answered.
The sequel had a few good ideas. The first had a few more, but they were both somewhat flat. The best idea was the underdeveloped East India Company's plot for domination of the seas.
I would have had more about that, and less water-wheel fights and seemingly endless scenes in which characters wait before shooting barrels of rum. Just shoot them! Stop looking at the rum and shoot it! I've been waiting what feels like an hour... Captain Jack's back. Perhaps he'll shoot the rum? Thanks you.
Quote from: ProgZmax on Thu 27/07/2006 10:41:03
Now if he somehow got a piece of the gold before dying (which seems to be the case) I suppose that the curse sustains him,
I would hope they have a better plot reason for his reappearance than rehashing the curse (aside from the point that said curse would keep him unable to eat apples, and give him no reason to be friendly to Jack). It's quite possible that the Voodoo Lady used her magic to resurrect him, instead. It's also quite possible that he isn't really alive per se.
QuoteWe know only this from the film: it ignores injuries that occur while cursed,
Narrative convenience, I'm afraid :)
I didn't like it, but it left me curious enough to make see the third part when it comes out. It was very much like
The Matrix Reloaded in that respect.
I did not like neither because I don't like long movies in general (I like the
Lord of the Rings and
Forrest Gump for example) nor because I don't like sequels in general (I like
Spider-Man 2 and
Shrek 2 for example) nor even because I don't like blockbusters with a lot of hype surrounding them in general (I like
Finding Nemo and
Jurassic Park for example), even though there are probably more examples of movies I didn't like than ones that I liked in all of these categories.
I didn't find
PotC 2 funnier than the first one, only sillier. There were lots of superfluous silly scenes which could have been cut to make the movie shorter. For example, the entire cannibal island subplot. I didn't like the character design of the villains very much. Davy Jones actually made me hope that they'll never do a big budget Cthulhu movie. Come to think of it, there was hardly anything I did like about the villains. In the first part many of the cursed pirates felt like individuals, here they were only an amorpous mass (in more than one sense). It also felt like that they just picked the name of Davy Jones for flavour and just threw in other random elements for good measure, like Captain Nemo's organ playing, the tentacled face, the totally unrelated and very ugly Flying Dutchman or even Bootstrap Bill. It's probably hard to pull off a good plot without good villains and I think they didn't manage to pull it off this time.
I did like the special effects most of the time, for example, even though I didn't like the way Davy Jones looked like, I found the combination of make-up and computer graphics very convincing and for most of the part the special effects weren't noticeable as such, which is how good special effects should be.
Spoiler
The only bad effects were the slow-motion of the bullet Jack fires at the net of explosive barrels and the scene where Jack is eaten by the Kraken.
I did like that they brought back Norrington, who was one of my favourite characters in the first movie, albeit with a radically changed character this time, and who's return came as a pleasant suprise to me, as mentionng in the beginning that he resigned and went away made it sound like to me that the actor didn't have time or wanted too much money and wouldn't be showing up at all.
I think every mention of
Spoiler
Barbossa
should be marked as a spoiler. As far as cliffhangers go, which I'm not too fond of, this one was OK, I guess.
My little brother told me a possible explanation for some of the things... I think it's pretty good and interesting, so I'll put it in spoilers:
Spoiler
Jack Sparrow died at sea and took up Davy Jones' offer to serve... but rather than 100 years, 13 years on the Black Pearl. So Jack Sparrow has the curse of Davy Jones. He tries to keep this fact a secret. By the way, this is why in the first movie, he took a bite out of the poisoned apple Captain Barbados had and didn't die--Barbados shows a look of surprise. (this is left unexplained in the movie)
At the end of the first movie, Jack Sparrow becomes undead, but that's just the curse of the gold--so he has two curses simultaneously.
Anyway, Jack having the curse of Davy Jones and being already dead would also explain why he would jump into the kraken's mouth... and apparently survive this.
Captain Barbados, perhaps after dying in the first movie, met (because he was close to sea) Davy Jones, and took up the deal. This would explain why Captain Barbados is alive in the end of the second movie (but perhaps with the curse of Davy Jones).
Anyway, comments appreciated!
the command for hiding the spoilers is [ hide ] dear Geoffkhan! Please, change it because I've accidentally read some parts... :'(
Quote from: Nacho on Thu 03/08/2006 07:13:05
the command for hiding the spoilers is [ hide ] dear Geoffkhan! Please, change it because I've accidentally read some parts... :'(
I can't believe you read it before I edited it... (I edited it so fast that it doesn't say "edited by...")
Sorry about that. Bad memory and all, I forgot the correct tag. :P
No probs... I am quite good at forgetting information, I am sure that the scene will surprise me in the movie... ^_^
comment:
Spoiler
who and where did you get the idea that the apple was cursed/poisoned?
Yeah the apple wasn't poisoned, it was his apple that he was keeping for when he lifted the curse. ???
Anyways, saw it yesterday and I really enjoyed it - not as much as the first one - but that's pretty much always the case. I also remember thinking during the movie that Norrington was wearing the EXACT same thing as Guybrush from MI2. Pirates rule. :D
Spoiler
Oh yeah and although I didn't really like the "make way for the sequel" ending, Barbosa coming back was one of my favourite parts of the whole movie. He's almost as cool as Jack Sparrow.
Best. Movie. Ever.
I'm gonna see it again and again. I'm gonna book out a cinema for an entire day and watch it over and over again.
I wanna friggin sex the entire cast.
Quote from: Zor on Thu 10/08/2006 17:01:30
Best. Movie. Ever.
I'm gonna see it again and again. I'm gonna book out a cinema for an entire day and watch it over and over again.
I wanna friggin sex the entire cast.
I've seen it... Ditto.
Too long, too convoluted, self-important story. Only really very good when Jack Sparrow was on the screen - Keira and Orlando are just damp fireworks.
Quote from: MarkPhantom on Fri 11/08/2006 12:13:26
Keira and Orlando are just damp fireworks.
True, but they play the nice characters. Orlando Bloom isn't supposed to be funny, and Keira isn't supposed to be tough. It's their characters, and also, they shouldn't change. Their dependence on others make the other characters important. Look at
The Mummy. Great movie. The characters were funny, clever, and each had their own flaws. In
The Mummy Returns they've changed way too much.
I think POTCII balanced the characters out just fine.
And of course, Jack Sparrow kicks ass.
Jack and Barbossa are really aliens or robots or both.
Mysteries solved.
Sorry if this has been asked before, but in POTC 1 there is a final scene after the credits, which is quite important:
Spoiler
The ghost monkey appears, which everything that implies, resurrecting Barbossa and all that...
I've read there's a similar scene, after the credits, in POTC 2. Someone who has seen it can post it about what was it about (Using the hide feature of course), or PM me?
Thanks.
I haven't seen the scene but I will today, (I'm seeing the movie again).
This is what I've heard:
Spoiler
Apparently it's just about the cannibals making the dog their new chief like Jack was.
Will edit in more depth this afternoon when I come back from seeing it!
(http://www.2dadventure.com/ags/060811.jpg)
Ok Farlander it's really nothing. About the biggest anti-climax ever. I waited through the entire credits promising my friends that there REALLY was an extra scene (very long credits).
Spoiler
OK it lasted about 5 seconds. It starts with a cannibal with white bodypaint dancing around a fire and then pans right to a throne whereupon sits the dog looking very happy. That's it. No really that's all. :D
Anyway still a kickass movie.
Jet, you beat me to it.
Zor - Note that Farlander said "POTC 1", which does in fact have the ending he is referring to.
Tiki - Note that he also asked about the scene after the second film's credits.
No Tiki He actually did ask about Pirates 2! ;D
I've mentioned POTC because there was also a scene in the end, after the credits, but my question was about POTC 2... Anyway, I went to the cinema and saw it personally... ^_^
Just for those who have seen the movie...
Spoiler
I was hoping to see Jack in the water after defeating the craken...Ã, :'( I know they will resurrect him, but it could have been cool to him to manage to save himself with no external help... I am still confident he did it, we will see in part 3
Disclaimer - I've not read the entire thread so I don't know if any of this was previously mentioned (I'm at work and can't take too much time to read it all right now but I wanted to weigh in the movie)
I really enjoyed the movie. The sword fight scene w/ Norrington and Jack and Will on the wheel was WAY cool.
Having said that I have some complaints:
1) too long. I'm all about lengthy movies when they need to be long, but this movie didn't need to be near 3 hours long.
2) too many re-characters. I don't mind (and it's logical in sequels) that there are some of the same characters but it was like they were just throwing in the popular ones (the two goofy guys from the first one) for no reason.
3) Elizabeth. Now don't get me wrong ... I could stare at Keira Knightly all freakin' day ... but in the first movie she was a resourceful, if somewhat naive, young woman who, suddenly in the sequel, is a swash-buckling sword master? It was too over the top and I think they were just trying to capitalize on her "bad girl" persona she developed between black pearl and Dead man's chest (w/ films like Arthur and Domino).
4) my biggest gripe (which I'm sure most won't agree with) is the "urkle" syndrome. They took 10% of Jack Sparrow from the first film (the quirky silliness) and made it 90% of his character in the sequel. I felt like he was a bumbling idiot in this movie. Think of the scene in the first when they are stealing the ship and Wil says, "here they come" and jack turns toward the camera and gives that little smile ... THAT was jack sparrow. Not some dainty feminine ninny like he seemed in the sequel.
Having said all that I still rather enjoyed the movie and I love a good cliffhanger ending.
The problem with some sequels is that the movie almost acts like the preceding film never happened... POTC goes a little too far in the other direction... it was annoying to hear the same exact lines in very similar situations as what happened in the first film. You could almost tell they were coming, in a bad way. Not that this happened a bunch or that I didn't love the first one, but I found these moments uninspired.
It wasn't a huge problem, though. The length was. The entire cannibal sequence had nothing to do with the main plot. It was fun sure, and really that's what matters most, but it had practically nothing to do with the story. The scene where Elizabeth faked fainting on the beach while Jack, Will, and the washed up commodore were fighting was unintentionally funny and completely useless. The water wheel fight scene was great, but it dragged on I thought. These three had been fighting for a good while now and it was starting to get dull. Maybe they could have cut out a lot of the previous fighting?
I thought Davey Jones was very good. His voice and look and everything was nothing short of awesome, except for the organ-playing session. The character should have been explored more though... I know almost nothing about him. His crew was laughable at best though... am I supposed to be intimidated by some guy with a hammerhead shark head in place of a human one? Or the one with a hermit crab for a head? Stupid.
Jack really was just a bumbling idiot in this one. He's no longer the smooth, manipulative, unorthodox hero of old; replaced with a guy who practically does nothing right. Elizabeth and William were flat characters. There were a lot of things wrong with the movie, but you know what? It was fun to watch. The good easily outweighs the bad. There were plenty of memorable moments. The effects were great as was the music. And I loved the twist ending, the voodoo lady, Davey Jones, and the action. No other pirate movies have come out for a long time, and it's a nice change of pace to watch a movie placed in a mysterious version of sail-era carribean than to watch another by-the-books action flick. It's a good movie set in a superb universe. 4/5
Quote from: Alliance on Sat 12/08/2006 00:57:29
Quote from: MarkPhantom on Fri 11/08/2006 12:13:26
Keira and Orlando are just damp fireworks.
True, but they play the nice characters. Orlando Bloom isn't supposed to be funny, and Keira isn't supposed to be tough. It's their characters, and also, they shouldn't change. Their dependence on others make the other characters important. Look at The Mummy. Great movie. The characters were funny, clever, and each had their own flaws. In The Mummy Returns they've changed way too much.
I think POTCII balanced the characters out just fine.
And of course, Jack Sparrow kicks ass.
No, I don't ever accept the excuse that they're 'supposed' to be like that. The characters could have been more fun, could have been more interesting - but they just left them as pretty poster boys. Yes, The Mummy Returns changed the characters FAR too much (reincarnation of Egyptian Princess? Karate? EH?) but if you're going to expand your characters for your sequel, make them more solid. And make Keira's 'tough girl' character three hundred times less irritating.
I guess we could all make a wonderfull movie!
heh
I love the movie :)
I really need to watch it again to catch all the details I think, but I enjoyed it.
The thing that Keira acts piratish isn't bad, but I think they overdone it a bit. The part where she forced that guy from the East indian trading thing was great! But she shouldn't be able to sword fight that well imo.
The voodoo lady was marvellous! And the jar o' dirt too!!
Really reminded me a lot of MI 2, which ofcourse is great.
The kraken was great too! Based on old myths where octopusses would turn over ships with their tentacles.
Also davy jones based somewhat on ctulhu (thanks Nacho ;)) That's great!
I really didn't think Jack was a lot different in this part then in part 1.
I found it kind of refreshing that they didn't really team up. Everyone followed their own goal,
Spoiler
leaving jack on the ship and all.
I liked it.
Waiting for part 3Ã, ;D
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/lancashire/films/images/pirates/jack_sparrow270.jpg)
Sequels aren't always that bad, some I really like:
The Bourne Supremacy
X-Men 2
Spiderman 2
Leathal Weapon parts
American Pie
But alas, there sure are a lot of dissapointing sequels
Being a daughter to the governor/high ranking official of the time period, I would find it highly plausible for her to have learned some sort of fencing or sword fighting.
Perhaps, but she was depicted as not having done so in the first film. Then Will gives her some lessons, and all of a sudden she's amazing at it?
Davy Jones's crew were a bunch of pushovers, if you ask me. They'd probably been picking on the dead and nearly dead so long that they were out of practice at doing any real fighting.