Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 21, 2021 19:26:51 GMT 1
The original Pirates of the Caribbean came out when I was in high school. I thought it was great then, and I continued to love it into adulthood. However, after returning to it last night for the first time in years I found that, although I still enjoyed parts of it (Johnny Depp and Geoffrey Rush, mainly) I just didn’t really like it all that much anymore. It felt kind of silly and overly cute.
And it was kind of jarring seeing it with such a new and negative perspective, especially since I still love A LOT of goofy fantasy movies so my taste, generally speaking, hasn’t changed all that much.
It actually made me kind of sad to feel this way while watching it. I’m trying to convince myself that I just wasn’t in the mood for it or something.
|
|
|
Post by Grandmaster on Feb 21, 2021 19:38:42 GMT 1
The original Pirates of the Caribbean came out when I was in high school. I thought it was great then, and I continued to love it into adulthood. However, after returning to it last night for the first time in years I found that, although I still enjoyed parts of it (Johnny Depp and Geoffrey Rush, mainly) I just didn’t really like it all that much anymore. It felt kind of silly and overly cute. And it was kind of jarring seeing it with such a new and negative perspective, especially since I still love A LOT of goofy fantasy movies so my taste, generally speaking, hasn’t changed all that much. In that case I would stay away from the original Star Wars trilogy if I were you.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 21, 2021 19:45:51 GMT 1
The original Pirates of the Caribbean came out when I was in high school. I thought it was great then, and I continued to love it into adulthood. However, after returning to it last night for the first time in years I found that, although I still enjoyed parts of it (Johnny Depp and Geoffrey Rush, mainly) I just didn’t really like it all that much anymore. It felt kind of silly and overly cute. And it was kind of jarring seeing it with such a new and negative perspective, especially since I still love A LOT of goofy fantasy movies so my taste, generally speaking, hasn’t changed all that much. In that case I would stay away from the original Star Wars trilogy if I were you.
|
|
|
Post by Indiana Jones on Feb 21, 2021 21:36:28 GMT 1
I still like the franchise overall. The first two I think are excellent, At World's End is long but has some great action scenes. Even the last two I didn't mind that much.
|
|
|
Post by Chalice_Of_Evil on Feb 21, 2021 23:05:28 GMT 1
When the first was released and I saw it in the theatre, I liked it well enough...but wasn't as in love with it as a lot of people seemed to be.
When I saw the second at the theatre, I remember coming away from it finding I had a headache and sore eyes (due to it's length). I had mixed feelings about it. However, a curious thing happened as I watched #2 on DVD again and again - I started liking it more and more. It's now gotten to the point where I think it might be my favourite of the franchise. I can't really explain why.
The third one was a major disappointment for me from the moment I watched it at the theatre. I rarely ever rewatch it (it's also the only one I don't own on DVD or Blu-ray). My opinion of it hasn't changed. It just felt like they went overboard with EVERY aspect of it - the jokes/visual gags, the convoluted plot, the runtime - and it remains my least favourite of the franchise.
The fourth one wasn't much better than the third, for me, but I don't hate it quite as much as #3. The only part I really liked in it was the vampire mermaids. It's still the most forgettable, though.
The fifth one, while not as good as the first two, was at least better than # and #4, I thought and I'm glad that's where the story for Jack, Will and Elizabeth seemed to conclude. While it didn't quite go out on a 'high', it didn't go out on an all-time 'low' either.
I imagine the Margot Robbie movie will be the start of a whole new story.
In conclusion, there's two movies in the franchise I really enjoy (#1 and #2), two that I don't enjoy (#3 and #4) and one that I mildly enjoy (#5).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2021 2:02:21 GMT 1
I still like the franchise overall. The first two I think are excellent, At World's End is long but has some great action scenes. Even the last two I didn't mind that much. I just didn't like the Penelope Cruz one. Think that bored me
|
|
|
Post by Indiana Jones on Feb 22, 2021 4:34:24 GMT 1
I still like the franchise overall. The first two I think are excellent, At World's End is long but has some great action scenes. Even the last two I didn't mind that much. I just didn't like the Penelope Cruz one. Think that bored me I liked it fine except for the ending. It was way too rushed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2021 4:03:23 GMT 1
Update: watched this again tonight and really liked it again. Weird. I was in a terrible mood when I watched last time so I guess that factored in.
|
|
|
Post by AQUA JAR!™ on Mar 4, 2021 4:48:38 GMT 1
DUM!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2021 5:07:16 GMT 1
Update: watched this again tonight and really liked it again. Weird. I was in a terrible mood when I watched last time so I guess that factored in. Next in breaking news: Water is wet! The entity called H2O will be interviewed about this huge revelation shortly
|
|
|
Post by Indiana Jones on Mar 5, 2021 0:34:28 GMT 1
Update: watched this again tonight and really liked it again. Weird. I was in a terrible mood when I watched last time so I guess that factored in. It happens.
|
|
|
Post by Nightman on Mar 9, 2021 1:29:03 GMT 1
Dead Man's Chest and At World's End are masterpieces. I have no idea why people say At World's End is too complicated; its main characters all have motivations, which is a refreshing change, but it's not like it's hard to follow.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2021 2:46:35 GMT 1
Dead Man's Chest and At World's End are masterpieces. I have no idea why people say At World's End is too complicated; its main characters all have motivations, which is a refreshing change, but it's not like it's hard to follow. I enjoy the complexity of those two and the various motivations of all the characters. It’s really clever in that respect... but I think they ventured too far into the realm of fantasy. It was no longer a pirate adventure but a full blown fantasy world. And the humor got really goofy. Jack Sparrow became kind of a cartoon character.
|
|
|
Post by Nightman on Mar 9, 2021 11:17:34 GMT 1
Dead Man's Chest and At World's End are masterpieces. I have no idea why people say At World's End is too complicated; its main characters all have motivations, which is a refreshing change, but it's not like it's hard to follow. I enjoy the complexity of those two and the various motivations of all the characters. It’s really clever in that respect... but I think they ventured too far into the realm of fantasy. It was no longer a pirate adventure but a full blown fantasy world. And the humor got really goofy. Jack Sparrow became kind of a cartoon character. Heh, the fantasy aspects were the only reason I watched them. I have very low tolerance for non-fantasy tales.
|
|
|
Post by AQUA SALZ! on Mar 9, 2021 18:41:33 GMT 1
Weirdly enough, I only really like 1 and 4. 2 and 3 I’ve always found long and meandering (though I love Davy Jones’ design), and 5 I thought pretty much a disaster. But 1 I still love—it’s also the only one in which I don’t find Sparrow cartoonish or overwhelming. 4 isn’t as good as 1, but I like the settings and set pieces, especially the mermaid attack. (They should’ve just done a faithful adaptation of Tim Powers’ excellent source material, though.)
|
|
|
Post by AQUA JAR!™ on Mar 9, 2021 18:47:20 GMT 1
I only remember seeing the first one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2021 20:29:36 GMT 1
Weirdly enough, I only really like 1 and 4. 2 and 3 I’ve always found long and meandering (though I love Davy Jones’ design), and 5 I thought pretty much a disaster. But 1 I still love—it’s also the only one in which I don’t find Sparrow cartoonish or overwhelming. 4 isn’t as good as 1, but I like the settings and set pieces, especially the mermaid attack. (They should’ve just done a faithful adaptation of Tim Powers’ excellent source material, though.) I also really like the Davy Jones design. He could’ve been a pretty great villain but he gets no pay off in DMC, and is then mostly sidelined in AWE. I think part two could’ve been exceptional had it been more self contained. Being a double parter gives it permission to meander and become really self indulgent. The islander sequence adds nothing for instance, and just feels like popcorn stupidity. If they had provided a conclusion for Davy Jones, forcing the entire script to become tighter, then ended with Jack being taken by the Kraken this movie would’ve been a lot better I think. Then part 3 could’ve focused more on that Calypso thing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2021 23:14:18 GMT 1
Weirdly enough, I only really like 1 and 4. 2 and 3 I’ve always found long and meandering (though I love Davy Jones’ design), and 5 I thought pretty much a disaster. But 1 I still love—it’s also the only one in which I don’t find Sparrow cartoonish or overwhelming. 4 isn’t as good as 1, but I like the settings and set pieces, especially the mermaid attack. (They should’ve just done a faithful adaptation of Tim Powers’ excellent source material, though.) My God, Skalzmark and I are in complete agreement about something! But for real, I actually only mostly agree. For me, the only one I can watch and rewatch any significant number of times close together is the original. I like 4 fine, but I'd never rewatch it again in the same year. 2 and 3 SO obviously suffered from "trying to copy 'Lord of the Rings'" syndrome. You can tell those films were meant to be one film that had stretched and warped into two.
|
|
|
Post by primemcgee on Mar 9, 2021 23:22:11 GMT 1
I watched it after a number of years and thought--wow-I am surprised I liked it given how Disney sucks. It wasn't so bad then.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2021 0:07:00 GMT 1
Weirdly enough, I only really like 1 and 4. 2 and 3 I’ve always found long and meandering (though I love Davy Jones’ design), and 5 I thought pretty much a disaster. But 1 I still love—it’s also the only one in which I don’t find Sparrow cartoonish or overwhelming. 4 isn’t as good as 1, but I like the settings and set pieces, especially the mermaid attack. (They should’ve just done a faithful adaptation of Tim Powers’ excellent source material, though.) My God, Skalzmark and I are in complete agreement about something! But for real, I actually only mostly agree. For me, the only one I can watch and rewatch any significant number of times close together is the original. I like 4 fine, but I'd never rewatch it again in the same year. 2 and 3 SO obviously suffered from "trying to copy 'Lord of the Rings'" syndrome. You can tell those films were meant to be one film that had stretched and warped into two. The third one tries way too hard to be epic. Liz gives that huge Braveheart speech about freedom. It's clearly trying to be the Return of the King of Pirate movies, only it forgets it's a movie about pirates!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2021 0:15:47 GMT 1
The only part of movie 3 that I like is the pirate hell. Jack in a waterless abyss trying to drag his ship by a rope is wonderfully surreal. The rock crabs are cool too.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2021 0:21:28 GMT 1
My God, Skalzmark and I are in complete agreement about something! But for real, I actually only mostly agree. For me, the only one I can watch and rewatch any significant number of times close together is the original. I like 4 fine, but I'd never rewatch it again in the same year. 2 and 3 SO obviously suffered from "trying to copy 'Lord of the Rings'" syndrome. You can tell those films were meant to be one film that had stretched and warped into two. The third one tries way too hard to be epic. Liz gives that huge Braveheart speech about freedom. It's clearly trying to be the Return of the King of Pirate movies, only it forgets it's a movie about pirates! And honestly, the fact that they're fighting for the freedom of PIRATES is a big part of what kills the attempts at epicness for me. Yeah, the theme of defending freedom against the reins of a Totalitarian government is fine... when the people who are about to be "subjugated" aren't criminals. Oh, no, the East India Trading Company is taking steps to ensure that their wares can be safely delivered to their destinations and their employees aren't murdered, violated, and/or sold as slaves! THE HORROR!!!!! Seriously, a line or two revealing that Beckett was going to use the Flying Dutchman to take the throne of England or something similar would have gone a long ways towards justifying the third act of Pirates 3.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2021 0:25:08 GMT 1
The third one tries way too hard to be epic. Liz gives that huge Braveheart speech about freedom. It's clearly trying to be the Return of the King of Pirate movies, only it forgets it's a movie about pirates! And honestly, the fact that they're fighting for the freedom of PIRATES is a big part of what kills the attempts at epicness for me. Yeah, the theme of defending freedom against the reins of a Totalitarian government is fine... when the people who are about to be "subjugated" aren't criminals. Oh, no, the East India Trading Company is taking steps to ensure that their wares can be safely delivered to their destinations and their employees aren't murdered, violated, and/or sold as slaves! THE HORROR!!!!! Seriously, a line or two revealing that Beckett was going to use the Flying Dutchman to take the throne of England or something similar would have gone a long ways towards justifying the third act of Pirates 3. Absolutely. And they cut out all references to Beckett being a slave trader. The “mark” Jack left on Beckett was that he was hired to transport slaves and released them instead. Beckett then sunk Jack’s ship, which was in turn raised by Davy and renamed the Pearl. They cut this dialogue out of the final edit.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2021 0:28:12 GMT 1
And honestly, the fact that they're fighting for the freedom of PIRATES is a big part of what kills the attempts at epicness for me. Yeah, the theme of defending freedom against the reins of a Totalitarian government is fine... when the people who are about to be "subjugated" aren't criminals. Oh, no, the East India Trading Company is taking steps to ensure that their wares can be safely delivered to their destinations and their employees aren't murdered, violated, and/or sold as slaves! THE HORROR!!!!! Seriously, a line or two revealing that Beckett was going to use the Flying Dutchman to take the throne of England or something similar would have gone a long ways towards justifying the third act of Pirates 3. Absolutely. And they cut out all references to Beckett being a slave trader. The “mark” Jack left on Beckett was that he was hired to transport slaves and released them instead. Beckett then sunk Jack’s ship, which was in turn raised by Davy and renamed the Pearl. They cut this dialogue out of the final edit. That's like cutting Vader's reveal to Luke in Empire Strikes Back and then expecting audiences to understand why in the hell the latter is trying to redeem the former in Return of the Jedi.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2021 0:29:30 GMT 1
Absolutely. And they cut out all references to Beckett being a slave trader. The “mark” Jack left on Beckett was that he was hired to transport slaves and released them instead. Beckett then sunk Jack’s ship, which was in turn raised by Davy and renamed the Pearl. They cut this dialogue out of the final edit. That's like cutting Vader's reveal to Luke in Empire Strikes Back and then expecting audiences to understand why in the hell the latter is trying to redeem the former in Return of the Jedi. Yeah, it’s a really dumb thing to remove. I think they could’ve even shown it in flashback as a prologue. It would’ve really added some depth.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2021 0:36:02 GMT 1
That's like cutting Vader's reveal to Luke in Empire Strikes Back and then expecting audiences to understand why in the hell the latter is trying to redeem the former in Return of the Jedi. Yeah, it’s a really dumb thing to remove. I think they could’ve even shown it in flashback as a prologue. It would’ve really added some depth. Exactly. I will grant them there is historical context there concerning The East India Trading Company history buffs will at least understand, but still, Screenwriting 101, people. Don't skip your character motivations and backstories.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2021 0:37:07 GMT 1
Yeah, it’s a really dumb thing to remove. I think they could’ve even shown it in flashback as a prologue. It would’ve really added some depth. Exactly. I will grant them there is historical context there concerning The East India Trading Company history buffs will at least understand, but still, Screenwriting 101, people. Don't skip your character motivations and backstories. I bet the topic of slavery was deemed too heavy for a summer blockbuster.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2021 0:45:41 GMT 1
Exactly. I will grant them there is historical context there concerning The East India Trading Company history buffs will at least understand, but still, Screenwriting 101, people. Don't skip your character motivations and backstories. I bet the topic of slavery was deemed too heavy for a summer blockbuster. This makes the fact Beckett is utterly redundant to begin with even more hilarious. I remember being perplexed why this short, smarmy British dude was even there when the films had Davy Jones and the Kraken.
|
|
|
Post by Indiana Jones on May 15, 2022 18:18:36 GMT 1
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2022 23:34:44 GMT 1
|
|