CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: DEAD MEN TELL NO TALES Post-Release Discussion
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: DEAD MEN TELL NO TALES Post-Release Discussion

post #1 of 137
Thread Starter 

Hi, I'm Matt.  I'm the guy who likes AT WORLD'S END the best of the series and thinks DEAD MAN'S CHEST is better than CURSE OF THE BLACK PEARL.  They're all too long, but the crazier Verbinski went, the more I enjoyed it.

 

Let's not talk about ON STRANGER TIDES.

 

Having said that, I thought DEAD MEN TELL NO TALES was fun.  It doesn't have a stand-out action scene like Verbinski's trilogy, but it has a nice focus on characters (while realizing Jack works best in a supporting role), and it's surprisingly heartfelt.  Geoffrey Rush gets even more scenery to chew on than usual, and a couple of new beats.

I thought it was a really satisfying conclusion to the series, and then the post-credits scene made me want another sequel.  Yep, blame me when it happens.

post #2 of 137

Too bad it doesn't have any action sequences up to Verbinski's level of batshit invention. I unabashedly adore the Cannibal Island and three-way sword fight sequences from DMC and the "flipping the boat" scene from AWE and it would've been great if they'd had something on that level.

post #3 of 137
How's Javier Bardem?
post #4 of 137
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dent6084 View Post
 

Too bad it doesn't have any action sequences up to Verbinski's level of batshit invention. I unabashedly adore the Cannibal Island and three-way sword fight sequences from DMC and the "flipping the boat" scene from AWE and it would've been great if they'd had something on that level.

 

There is a cool sequence involving multiple execution attempts and a guillotine.  It feels reasonably close to Verbinski's spark.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Draco Senior View Post

How's Javier Bardem?

 

Fun, but not in it as much as you'd probably think.

post #5 of 137

Did you know its released as Salazar's Revenge here in Asia?

post #6 of 137

http://www.avclub.com/article/hackers-demand-disney-pay-bitcoin-ransom-or-theyll-255376

 

"Hackers demand Disney pay Bitcoin ransom or they’ll leak new Pirates movie"

 

Top rated comment:

 

"In response, Disney demands that the world pays them a cash ransom, or they'll release the new Pirates movie."

post #7 of 137

Glad to hear it's something of a rebound from ON STRANGER TIDES.  I'll take it.

post #8 of 137

I won't. The wife abuser doesn't deserve my money.

post #9 of 137
The reviews are coming out, and shock of shocks, they are not great!

I've already made my plans though. Big fan of what this series could have been.
post #10 of 137
I'm seeing a lot of reviews suggesting Rush remains the MVP, and there's more of him than expected. That's nice!
post #11 of 137
It can't possibly be worse than Stranger Tides. No way.
post #12 of 137
I thought Dark Shape said this was good.
post #13 of 137

Even the negative reviews are getting me excited for this movie.  That's how much I still enjoy this series.

post #14 of 137
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bradito View Post

I thought Dark Shape said this was good.


I said I liked it, just as I liked DEAD MAN'S CHEST and AT WORLD'S END, and those also came in rotten at RT.

post #15 of 137
Will I like it?
post #16 of 137
Thread Starter 

How sexually attracted are you to Geoffrey Rush

post #17 of 137
The normal amount, I guess.
post #18 of 137
Thread Starter 

Go to the El Capitan covered in lubricant.

post #19 of 137
This better not be a trick!
post #20 of 137
It's all spectacle, but it's fun spectacle.
post #21 of 137
Me covered in lubricant?
post #22 of 137

you wearing spectacles

post #23 of 137

I've been watching the series, as build up to the new one! And what a chore it's become!

 

The original is still surprising in how good it is. Everything you could want from a film of this type. It absolutely breathes personality, and even at a longish running time, always keeps moving from one good scene to the next. Depp is loads of fun, as is Rush. You can really tell why Keira Knightley continues to work, and why Orlando Bloom does not. The only thing that doesn't hold up are the effects, which I recall being great at the time. Now, they're basically snapchat overlays. But it doesn't matter. Still really fun.

 

Dead Man's Chest is not as good as I remember, mostly because of all the mechanisms that force it into being only half a story. There's an excellent movie in here that's been pretzeled into too many goddamn things, all of which are not equal. The Davy Jones/Kraken stuff is all terrific, and those effects are actually quite terrific. But the Jack/Will/Elizabeth stuff is all overthought and overcomplicated. At World's End is still bad, which is very disappointing, because it has a lot of nice elements in it. The opening hour has a lot of neat weird sequences, and even if it doesn't make sense, strictly speaking, or move the narrative forward in a smart way, it's all unique and Verbinski directs the hell out of it. Then the last two hours (!!) happen, and it becomes so wildly anemic and pointless that it angered me. The attempts at comedy, for example, are particularly labored and unsuccessful, which is something this film really had on lock in the first entry. At least Rush is back.

 

More than just about any other franchise, this one suffers from trying to be like other franchises, specifically Lord of the Rings. If they'd just worried about making one good Davy Jones/Kraken movie and worried about a third one later, I think everyone would have enjoyed it more. The second and especially the third ones really feel half done narratively, like they had no where near enough time to write the script, and excise the unneeded stuff. Verbinski does his damnedest, but the enormity of this thing gets away from everyone.

 

Will I make time for On Stranger Tides? Unclear, but I've only seen it the one time, so I hope I do. I've already got plans for the new one on Thursday night, so the clock is ticking.

post #24 of 137
I believe you can make time, Arjen!
post #25 of 137
You're just setting me up to fail. You want me to blow it!
post #26 of 137

A reviewer I trust called this an "endurance test". I hear the first third is pretty good, though!

post #27 of 137

I really like At World's End, because it's the only time Jack really has a character arc. His fear of death and wanting to take Jones's power is so fascinating, so his allowing Will to take the power instead is a big moment.

 

The rest of the movie after the Kraken's body is found is pretty shaky, though.

 

Dead Men Tell No Tales? Eh, boycott.

post #28 of 137
The two big mistakes At World's End makes are 1) not having Jack's first appearance be sailing over the dune on the wave of crabs (that Sartre-esque intro just reassessed and has none of the punch of Jack's previous intros) and 2) killing the kraken off-screen (either show Beckett killing it in front of Jones to underline his villainy or let the heroes dispatch it).
post #29 of 137

The original is, bar none, one of the best action-adventure films since RAIDERS. (Note I said action-adventure, not action. There's a difference.)

post #30 of 137

ON STRANGER TIDES should be better than AT WORLD'S END, but the movie's just got no blood coursing through its veins.  The Verbinski sequels may be unwieldy, but they've got panache and look every bit as expensive as they are, while TIDES is so by-the-numbers and cheap-looking that its virtues of being streamlined and standalone are cancelled out.  I shudder to think of what that movie would be like to watch if they hadn't been smart enough to bring Rush back.

post #31 of 137
There's so many fuck ups in AWE. Jack's fear of death thing is out of character, barely articulated, and what he supposedly wants is clearly some weird perdition, which is also barely articulated. The entire Tia Dalma character, who worked great as a regular old voodoo lady in DMC, all of a sudden becomes a sea goddess with an arcane back story, which involves a romance with Davy Jones (and man, who could possibly care about that), which is then resolved through incomprehensible nonsense involving her turning into a giant, screaming in a Goddess language, and dissolving into crabs. The only pay off to any of this is that there's a big whirlpool, which does nothing to help or hinder the pirates, and we're not sure if she's trying to help or hinder them. And then we never speak of her again. It's full of labyrinthine intrigue and double and triple crosses, all of which are not worth paying attention to (pretty much everyone but Barbossa, who's probably the character you most want to see do some double crossing). Then there's the whole plot line about Chinese pirates, which sort of intersects with everything but never matters. Having seen it too many times now, I can pretty much tell you what it all means, but I'm equally sure none of it is worth the effort. There's virtually nothing consistent in any of the characters, except the comic relief pirate buddies. And this is to say nothing of the Piracy = Freedom from Oppression theme they're trying to push.

It's a real shame too, because there's a lot of good stuff in there. Tom Hollander's droll bad guy deserves a real character to play, the effects work, for being rushed assuredly, looks very good. And there's a bunch of nice set pieces in the first hour. But it's a real case of overdoing it, and reminds me of nothing more than the worst parts of Jackson's Hobbit trilogy, although it's considerably less coherent than that.
post #32 of 137

Hmm, I actually think that Jack and Barbossa both pursuing highly dubious versions of immortality because they both have experience with supernatural hells is one of the better ideas in AT WORLD'S END.  We buy that Jack is terrified enough of the Locker that he'll do anything to bargain his way out of returning.  His myopia in glossing over the fate of being captain of the Flying Dutchman - which Will even points out - in order to live forever seems in-character enough.  This is after all the guy who previously bartered his soul for thirteen years (or whatever it was) as captain.

 

It's both interesting and lazy the way that ON STRANGER TIDES closes out the two characters' quest for immortality.  In the climax of AT WORLD'S END, Jack has to abandon his plan in order to save Will, while Barbossa's plan (which is hazier but seems to involve supernatural protection from Calypso) is scuttled when the goddess screws off.  But in the final moments of the movie, they're both seeking the fountain of youth, showing that they are still looking to live forever. 

 

Then in the fourth movie, we learn that Barbossa made his peace with mortality off-screen, when he decided to focus all his attention on revenge against Blackbeard.  Jack accepts mortality by the end of the movie, when he tells Gibbs that he can still live forever through infamy and legend, but it's never clear when or how he arrived at this wisdom.  At the beginning of the movie he doesn't seem all that passionate about finding the fountain (Gibbs even accuses him of this), and he only becomes less interested in the McGuffin as the movie unfolds.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arjen Rudd View Post

The entire Tia Dalma character, who worked great as a regular old voodoo lady in DMC, all of a sudden becomes a sea goddess with an arcane back story, which involves a romance with Davy Jones (and man, who could possibly care about that), which is then resolved through incomprehensible nonsense involving her turning into a giant, screaming in a Goddess language, and dissolving into crabs. The only pay off to any of this is that there's a big whirlpool, which does nothing to help or hinder the pirates, and we're not sure if she's trying to help or hinder them. And then we never speak of her again.

 

The ultimate idea of Calypso is that she was plotting to turn against the pirates all along, and it was only Will's final revelation of Jones' betrayal that made her go "neutral" by turning into a whirlpool and letting the two factions destroy each other.  I would agree that this wasn't particularly well communicated, though, nor was it necessarily a satisfying conclusion to the character.  The purpose it serves seems to be to give Barbossa his moment of letting go of his long-gestating plan and switching priorities, just as the stabbing of Will does for Jack.

post #33 of 137

What's frustrating is that - and I haven't seen the other two parts of the original trilogy other than in the theater when they came out - there's a really fascinating through-line about how the age of exploration and British control over the seas dovetailed with the end of the age of monsters, where for the first time, you actually knew, more or less, what was on the horizon. And how that was both less exciting and more dangerous at the same time. But that gets boiled down to piracy = freedom from oppression, without a real exploration that these were bad dudes. 

 

And I love the insinuation, which, again, is barely followed up on, that the British Empire in the time setting of the film are like the Nazis in Raiders. But all of that stuff is just lost. 

post #34 of 137
Yeah, the good version is in there somewhere. It's infuriating, at least for me.
post #35 of 137

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boone Daniels View Post

 

And I love the insinuation, which, again, is barely followed up on, that the British Empire in the time setting of the film are like the Nazis in Raiders. But all of that stuff is just lost. 

 

The movies definitely try to have it both ways by making it clear that it's the Company rather than the British themselves who are the villains, yet by the third movie the Company seems to have been given full authority over the British navy.  In DEAD MAN'S CHEST, there's a scene where Hollander's muscle prevents Swann from mailing a letter to the king for intercession, then later Tom Hollander demands Swann's "influence in London" in exchange for Elizabeth's safety.  This suggests that the Company strong-armed their way into becoming quasi-representatives of the crown.

post #36 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boone Daniels View Post

What's frustrating is that - and I haven't seen the other two parts of the original trilogy other than in the theater when they came out - there's a really fascinating through-line about how the age of exploration and British control over the seas dovetailed with the end of the age of monsters, where for the first time, you actually knew, more or less, what was on the horizon. And how that was both less exciting and more dangerous at the same time. But that gets boiled down to piracy = freedom from oppression, without a real exploration that these were bad dudes. 

One scene that kind captures the whole film's twisted comprehension of its own themes is Rush making his pitch to free Calypso to the Brethren Court. He rails against the British control of the sea, or really, any control of the sea, under the pretense that this goddess will remove that, and then finishes by damning eldritch bargains with the mystical world in favor of the sweat off a man's brow. The whole thing contradicts itself completely, and I wonder how Rush was even able to get through it (well, actually, I know how he did, and it's pure hambone hamminess).

And I don't even need the movies to explore that they're all rapists and murderers in the real life. Do the romantic version of piracy, its approrpiate to the film. Just don't pretend they're all a bunch of noble Bravehearts. It feels like they just plain don't know what the fuck they're doing.

Sorry to go big on this. Movie really gets my goat.
post #37 of 137
Mostly Elizabeth becoming the pirate king feels like they ran out of things to do with the character. And Knightley does not sell that speech at all.
post #38 of 137

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arjen Rudd View Post

One scene that kind captures the whole film's twisted comprehension of its own themes is Rush making his pitch to free Calypso to the Brethren Court. He rails against the British control of the sea, or really, any control of the sea, under the pretense that this goddess will remove that, and then finishes by damning eldritch bargains with the mystical world in favor of the sweat off a man's brow. The whole thing contradicts itself completely, and I wonder how Rush was even able to get through it (well, actually, I know how he did, and it's pure hambone hamminess).

 

Barbossa's hypocrisy in that speech is the point, which is why Jack criticizes it as "utterly deceptive twaddle-speak."  Barbossa has made his own personal deal with Calypso, and needs to rally the other pirates to the cause.  Later, when his plan fails, Elizabeth uses his own words on him during her cringy Braveheart speech, asking him to believe in them sincerely now.

post #39 of 137
But it's not hypocrisy, it's flat out circular nonsense. By the end he's arguing against releasing Calypso.

There's enough dangling plot lines in here that you can connect any dot to any any other dot, but the movie sure doesn't do any of that. It just rushes to the next effects sequence and overwritten group conversation/double cross.
post #40 of 137

I almost - almost - feel like that "corporations as the end of adventure" theme is handled better in Lone Ranger. 

post #41 of 137
FatherDude is on-point today making sense of the nonsense, though. His interpretations are better than the movie.
post #42 of 137

I'm sympathetic to all sides.  The movie is both a complete mess and better written than it's generally given credit for.  It's quite fun to discuss.

post #43 of 137
Thread Starter 

FatherDude in this thread is my spirit animal.  

 

Also his interpretations seem pretty clear in the movie itself?  For instance, you need that aimless seen with multiple Jacks in Davy Jones' locker because that's what drives his character for the rest of the movie.

post #44 of 137

I watched On Stranger Tides, and can confirm it's a better movie than At World's End. Rob Marshall is not a great director, and in fact most of the problems here are because of him - it's just never a film that grabs you in any way. But the actual things in the movie are, for the most part, just fine. They're all the sort of things a Pirates movie can and should have in it. Supernatural villains, voodoo, mythology based on 17th century nautical superstition, British character actors hamming it up like crazy. Everyone's doing things for reasons that make sense (mostly), and again, Geoffrey Rush can do no wrong in these. He pretty much keeps this one going all on his own. 

 

The issue is that this is just a safe, standard 4th-film-in-a-franchise kind of deal. That's the kind of thing that seems like a problem upon the film's release, when it's a new and inconsequential installment that costs 16 bucks to see, but watching at home years later, it's fine. Nothing more, but it's a pirates film, and at just over two hours, does down pretty easy. It's got a lot of ideas that are about, oh, 70% of the way there, like there mermaid sequence (nice idea, badly staged by Marshall on an obvious soundstage) and McShane's Blackbeard (they attempt to give him some Al Swearengen dialogue, but he's just the latest ghostly pirate captain in a series built on them). I understand someone preferring AWE's attempt to be just like Return of the King, it's certainly more ambitious. But I think I prefer the relative competency on display here, and it doesn't take Dead Man's Chest down in its wake. As a stand alone-ish pirate film, its OK, really!

 

And the young lovers subplot totally ends with her eating him.

post #45 of 137
I knew you could do it, Arjen!
post #46 of 137

I did it to spite you. I consider myself the Ragetti to your Pintel.

post #47 of 137
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arjen Rudd View Post
 

I watched On Stranger Tides, and can confirm it's a better movie than At World's End.

 

Blocked.

 

Also I'm fascinating that you keep comparing At World's End to Return of the King, because in the decade since that film has come out, I've never seen that comparison before.  They both have big fights and are sort of final chapters?

post #48 of 137

And you're the Governor Swann to my Jossamee Gibbs, Shape.

post #49 of 137
Thread Starter 

Can I please be Mr. Mercer instead.

 

post #50 of 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arjen Rudd View Post

I did it to spite you. I consider myself the Ragetti to your Pintel.

As long as I'm the ugly one.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Focused Film Discussion
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: DEAD MEN TELL NO TALES Post-Release Discussion