I Don't Hate Pirates

May 25, 2007 2:37 AM

urple Hays accused me of hating pirates tonight. I don't hate pirates--I love pirates. Pirates are way cooler than zombies, for example. And, although they might not have the sheer killing power of ninjas, they definitely have a swagger that ninjas lack. I love rum, love screaming "Argh!", and love calling women "wenches." I even love pirate outfits--one of my favorite pictures is of me, Mr. Morenononsense, and the Pole Medley in pirate costumes at--gasp--a pirate party.

No, the truth of the matter is that I love pirates. And it all started some years ago when I watched Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl. Who would have thought that a movie based on an (admittedly awesome) Disneyland ride could kick so much ass? I've probably watched that movie more than ten times, and I've loved it each time. It's just fun and exciting and great. It's one of my favorite movies.

I was disappointed by the sequel, Dead Man's Chest. I thought that it was too frantic and unsteady. I also thought that things got just a little bit too ridiculous. Where the first movie had never made a real attempt to be believable, I thought that the second film just sort of took the ridiculous ball and ran with it. Oh, and the characters started to get old--except for Captain Jack Sparrow, who kicked ass in pretty much every way. But I started to get really annoyed by Will and Elizabeth.

I was really excited to watch the last movie in the series, At World's End. So Mr. Vice, PH, and I went to sneak preview screening tonight. With apologies to my associates, while I was disappointed by Dead Man's Chest, I thought At World's End was a complete disaster. Everything I didn't like about the second movie was present ten fold in the third one: There was exactly no attempt to maintain any level of believability, and each character was essentially reduced to the same motivation--double cross at every opportunity. In the end, there were so many double crosses that they stopped being either surprising or expected--they were just obvious.

At least, I think they were double crosses. See, for about 90 percent of the movie, I had no idea what was going on. One of the things I really liked about the first movie was that there weren't really "good guys" and "bad guys." It was more like there were the guys we were rooting for and the guys we were rooting against. And a lot of the time we weren't sure who we were rooting for. And even when we thought we did, it turns out that it wasn't as simple as "sides." The second movie took that a little further. And the third movie took that concept straight to hell.

By the time the climax started building, I had absolutely no idea who was doing what why. There were so many storylines--some of which seemed to have nothing to do with anything else--that the whole thing became what can only be described as a storytelling clusterfuck. I assume that the producers wanted to make a frantic, complex swashbuckler. Unfortunately, as far as I'm concerned, they only succeeded in making a confusing mess.

And why--why--was there an extended sequence involving stones that are really crabs? Did that really need to go on that long?

In the end, I think a line of dialogue sums the movie up pretty well: after Captain Jack Sparrow, who had been held aboard an East India ship, manages to escape and render the ship incapable of pursuit, someone says something to the effect of "Do you think he plans it all ahead of time or just makes it up as he goes along?" I definitely got the sense that the producers made up At World's End as they went along. And it showed.

2 Comments

Vice said:

I'll admit, the movie had its problems. The middle third of the movie was a mess. The endless series of double-crosses (there must have been a line outside of Beckett's office for people to come in and make deals) wasn't necessary, and it made things needlessly complicated. The quasi-dream sequence with Jack and the rocks went on kinda long, and I wasn't a big fan of the "multiple Jacks" parts - that was weird. And obviously, the movie was about a half hour too long.

For all that, I was a lot happier walking out of this one than Dead Man's Chest. First, there were so many funny moments/lines. And the climax sequence around the maelstrom - that was one of the best I've seen in awhile. I found every moment of that thrilling, particularly with Jack flying around on the rope. And though it was pretty silly, I really enjoyed the Will/Elizabeth marriage ceremony. It reminded me of Mr. and Mrs. Smith, which a lot of people hated, but I really liked.

Sure, you really have to suspend disbelief. Not just that the entire thing is happening (pirates, curses, sea people, etc) but that a particular sequence of events could possibly happen, even making those initial assumptions. That was one thing I had a really hard time with in Dead Man's Chest - such as Jack as king of the savages, or the giant waterwheel fight. This time I was at least prepared for it to be over the top. I remember one moment in the movie where my reaction was essentially "There is no way that could ever happen -- wait, no, I don't care." Once I got over that, I enjoyed the shit out of this movie.

For the abovestated grounds, I respectfully dissent.

May 25, 2007 10:27 AM

Ismael Tapia II said:

Mr. Vice,
I actually kind of liked the marriage thing. What I didn't like was the unnecessary Will-Elizabeth drama throughout the movie. I might not remember very well, but didn't the drama start because Will thought that Elizabeth made out with Jack just before he died? And didn't she know that? And couldn't she have just told him that's what was going on? It seemed to me to be another instance of the Lost-type problem where people could avoid a conflict by sharing information, but don't for no reason.

I had forgotten about the multiple Jacks thing, but, yeah, that was really strange.

The maelstrom thing was ok, except that you'd think that having your ship's deck pitched at a 45 degree angle would hinder your ability to sword fight. But you'd be wrong, apparently.

Oh and, cinematically speaking, I really liked the scene where the lord guy is walking down the stairs and the ship is blowing up all around him.

I guess my issue wasn't so much with the required suspension of disbelief. I mean, I'm perfectly willing to believe pretty much anything on screen. Rather, my problem was that, especially as contrasted with the first one, the cool things didn't fit together as a whole. Ultimately, there were many cool lines and scenes, but they didn't fit together as a coherent narrative, thus diminishing their cool factor.

May 25, 2007 11:52 AM

Leave a comment

Name

Email Address

URL

Remember personal info?

Comments (You may use HTML tags for style)