Pirates 3

[JasonEvans]

Saw a preview last night (long night-- came home and watched 2 hours of Lost after almost 3 hours of Pirates).

It is better than #2 because it actually has an ending. Heck, it has like 4 endings. But, it is still very long and the story is often jumbled. I am frankly a little bit mystified that they made it so long. Like #2, there are entire sections that could have either been taken out or greatly shortened. I guess they thought it would be tough to fix some of these things without reshoots and water-based reshoots can be expensive.

The action and acting are good and you just get the sense the film is having fun as it tells its confusing tale. That's a good thing because it keeps you rooting for the characters and the story. By not really turning things to a dark, serious side this is a more enjoyable movie than, for example, Spidey 3.

Make no mistake, this is no great film. There are numerous problems- the soundtrack is too loud for you to understand the characters at times, the actions of the characters are sometimes mystifying, there are so many double-crosses it is hard to keep track of who is on which side, and several plot devices really fall flat (can't say more without spoilers but the "Calypso" story turns out to be really lame). But, I was entertained and that is the bottom line.

We are still waiting for a great movie this summer. This will be huge at the boxoffice (no duuuh) and is a decent ride, but we are still looking for something that satisfies without being badly flawed.

I saw a 9 minute sneak of Rat the other day and it looked really good. Some brilliant animation and seemed like the storytelling was strong. I just got a look at the new Transformers trailer too and, even though I remain unconvinced, it looks pretty solid. Should be a good summer.

--Jason "piost your thoughts on Pirates here, once you see it" Evans

[JasonEvans]

Oh, one more thing. The end does set up a potential plot for a Pirates #4. It is not a cliffhanger ending, by any stretch, but it could easily be done.

-Jason "Keith Richards, by the way, is NOT an actor" Evans

[feldspar]

We are still waiting for a great movie this summer. This will be huge at the boxoffice (no duuuh) and is a decent ride, but we are still looking for something that satisfies without being badly flawed.

I wonder if this will be the Bourne Ultimatum? I just don't see any "great" movies on the horizon. And, unfortunately, the back end of a trilogy usually doesn't lend itself to outstanding cinema, outside of LOTR and Star Wars (the original).

[JasonEvans]

Bump-- to let others post their toughts on this film.

By the way, I predict it does about 140 million in boxoffice over the weekend, just coming up short of Spidey's record because it started screening Thursday night and those do not count toward weekend records (and because it is too freaking long!).

-Jason "but, Pirates will make $400 million+, which Spidey will not" Evans

[Udaman]

Well, it was better than Spidey 3 and Shrek 3...but unfortunately, that is not saying much.

I thought the first 30 minutes was basically useless, and entirely confusing. The sound editing was the worst I have ever heard in a major movie (I kept thinking, "I need closed captioned here to figure out what these people are saying."

The entire story line of Callypso made no sense and was beyond anti-climactic (she turns into a bunch of crabs and runs off - what is that).

However, the last 30 minutes really saved the movie. Pirates has perfected the art of on-screen ship fighting. The two ships swirling around the vortex shooting at each other, and the marriage scene while fighting, and Captain Jack fighting Davey Jones...were all really well done. Also, I really enjoyed how they got out of Davey Jones Locker - very realistic and creative.

I will say that Keira Knightly is just beautiful...but she doesn't much look like a pirate. Depp was really good, and Richards (though he can't act) looked like he was about 40.

All in all, an OK movie - but not great. Still nothing great out yet. Now we have to wait until June 8th and Oceans 13 and Surfs Up.

[Channing]

I just saw it - I did not think it was better than either spidey three or shrek 3. Those other two entertained me, this movie just seemed to go on and on, with unclear plot twists at every turn.

I was very disappointed.

[Windsor]

My daughter and I saw it Thursday night. We both liked it. I agree that there are sections they could have skipped altogether or trimmed to shorten the running time. Some of the effects were really good - visually I think sometimes they got hung up on 'wow that is really cool looking' more than the moving the story along. The story is twisty are confusing in some spots, but at least it has a real ending, although as has been said, the door is wide open for a #4. Parts of it were just silly and the Calyspo thing was totally lame - that could have been done much better! I still really enjoyed it (OK, I confess if a movie has eye candy the caliber of Johnny Depp and Orlando Bloom I don't give a rats butt if the movie has a plot...or even sound!)

Windsor

[Cavlaw]

I liked it far better than 2, but not as much as 1. The end played out pretty much as I expected, as did the bonus scene after the credits rolled (a scene which I found incredibly depressing, despite the intention of being an upbeat closing).

I didn't have any trouble with the plot, but a few instances of deux ex machina had me grinding my teeth. The sound was fine in the theater I was in. I agree with Udaman, I was entertained for about 3 hours, but it wasn't a great movie.

I've been far more pleased with the strong of DVDs my wife and I have watched over the last couple of months:

Casino Royale, Blood Diamond, the Prestige, The Last King of Scotland, the Departed, Pan's Labrynth and (the only one I didn't like) The Good Shepard. Maybe I should stick to getting DVDs. The next flick we will see in the theater will be Harry Potter, then nothing until The Golden Compass.

[JasonEvans]

I've been far more pleased with the strong of DVDs my wife and I have watched over the last couple of months:

Casino Royale, Blood Diamond, the Prestige, The Last King of Scotland, the Departed, Pan's Labrynth and (the only one I didn't like) The Good Shepard. Maybe I should stick to getting DVDs. The next flick we will see in the theater will be Harry Potter, then nothing until The Golden Compass.

you have good taste in DVDs. I would have reccomended all of those except The Godo Shep, which I am on the record as not liking at all (Angelina Jolie's character was horrid and was I really expected to spend 3 hours with a Brad Pitt character who was utterly emotionless the entire film?).

If you are looking for more good DVD choices, allow me to point out a few:

- If you liked the Presitge, check out The Illusionist. I think the acting and plot are both better in The Illusionist, though there is less of a "mystery" to keep you hooked.

- A film I have been reccomending for a loong time but which most folks have not seen is The Matador with Pierce Brosnan and Greg Kinnear. Soem great acting in that and a fun story. I am not sold on the final act, felt a bit forced, but some really great acting in that one and a very fun story about a washed up contract killer.

- You have seen The Queen and Children of Men, right? I think Children of Men was the best film of the past year and The Queen was not far behind. Make sure you turn down the lights, unplug the phone, and really let yourself get immersed in Children of Men. It is violent, but brilliant. The moment you are done watching it, you will want to talk about it with friends. Come to this board as there are many of us here who adored it and have strong feelings.

-Jason "so many movies, so little time" Evans

[Cavlaw]

I hadn't heard about The Illusionist, but may have to give it a chance. Aside from Ed Norton, I'm skeptical about it having better acting than the Prestige. I'm not much of a Giamatti fan (but like him ok), don't care for Sewell, and can't stand Biel.

I've been interested in the Matador for a long time, but haven't broken down and paid full price for it yet (I can never seem to find it on sale).

I haven't yet seen the Queen or Children of Men. As good as The Queen is supposed to be, any plotline involving Princess Diana just puts me off. It just doesn't interest me. Children of Men struck me as a Clive Owen action flick, and I'm not a big Clive Owen fan... however, the reviews seem to indicate otherwise, so perhaps I should give it a go.

[JasonEvans]

I hadn't heard about The Illusionist, but may have to give it a chance. Aside from Ed Norton, I'm skeptical about it having better acting than the Prestige. I'm not much of a Giamatti fan (but like him ok), don't care for Sewell, and can't stand Biel.

I've been interested in the Matador for a long time, but haven't broken down and paid full price for it yet (I can never seem to find it on sale).

I haven't yet seen the Queen or Children of Men. As good as The Queen is supposed to be, any plotline involving Princess Diana just puts me off. It just doesn't interest me. Children of Men struck me as a Clive Owen action flick, and I'm not a big Clive Owen fan... however, the reviews seem to indicate otherwise, so perhaps I should give it a go.

Illusionist is an Ed Norton tour-de-force. It is all about him and his performance is great. I thought almost everyone in The Prestige was too over-the-top and mellowdramatic. Norton does his thing in a mostly understated way, which worked for me. The two movies are pretty close in my mind and if you liked one, I think you'll like the other. I just felt the story in the illusionist held up better at the end. The final 1/3rd of The Prestige sorta started to fall apart if you ask me.

Can't you just rent The Matador? Why is cost a factor at all? Be warned, it is far from a perfect film and, like I said, I think it sputtered a bit toward the end, but there is some great acting and a few truly brilliant moments in the movie.

If you hate Di and the royal family, then you can avoid The Queen. I liked it for the intimate view of what life is like for the royals. I am not royal-phile, but I really enjoyed that part of it. The acting is as good as you'll see, but you already knew that.

Children of Men has a ton of Clive Owen in it, but I think the style of the direction is the real star of the film. It is hyper-real and a testament to the great skill of Alphonso Cuaron. If you appreciate the great detail that it takes to be a successful director, you've got to see this amazing pic. There is a ton of action, but it does not come off like your typical action film. The story is much more thoughtful than you usually expect in this kind of film.

-Jason "I cannot fathom how Cuaron was not nominated for Best Director" Evans

[Cavlaw]

I picked up the Matador and Children of Men today, I'll let you know what I think of them when I get a chance.

My wife and I are big Brosnan fans (outside of the Bond movies, though we enjoyed Goldeneye) and I really like Cuaron.

I buy my DVDs because I live in the loop - no nearby places to rent, and living in a highrise building where packages can only be picked up during slightly extended business hours is a pain for me due to my work schedule. We just bought a place, so I might consider it after we move in, but my philosophy is basically, since my wife and I don't go to the theater anymore, the cost of DVD is basically the same, and then I can give it to my parents or brother to watch when we're done with it.

[Cavlaw]

Back on topic, I've heard some rumors that the "alternate ending" was attached to the theatrical release (thus making it the real ending) and the original "real ending" will be included as an alternate ending on the DVD. anyone have any insights on this?

I don't know what it is, but the current ending is really gnawing at me in a depressing way. I usually like less-than-perfect endings, but something about this one in particular is bugging me...

[Channing]

I didnt stick around to see what happened after the credits - I was antsy to move around after what seemed like 7 hrs of movie watching. I saw the movie ending obviously, with Jack and the map he stole from Barbosa - was there more after the credits (as CavLaw seems to imply)?

[rthomas]

yea, 10 years later. About 20 second clip. My daughter made me stay.

[JasonEvans]

Back on topic, I've heard some rumors that the "alternate ending" was attached to the theatrical release (thus making it the real ending) and the original "real ending" will be included as an alternate ending on the DVD. anyone have any insights on this?

I don't know what it is, but the current ending is really gnawing at me in a depressing way. I usually like less-than-perfect endings, but something about this one in particular is bugging me...

Are you talking about Pirates 3 or something else? It is not clear from your post.

I too missed the post-credits Pirates add-on scene. Can anyone describe it?

-Jason "a run for the exits after a 3 hour movie was mandatory" Evans

[JasonEvans]

Well, that took all of 5 seconds to find...

Here is the post-credits ending to Pirates.

After the credits roll...

TEN YEARS LATER - we see a little boy of about ten years old running through the countryside by the shore, followed shortly by Elizabeth. The pair go to the edge of the cliff and watch the sunset. As the last rays of light touch the horizon, the sun flashes green and starts to rise again. In the distance, a ship can now be seen approaching the shore and onboard, Will Turner looks up at his family and smiles.

-Jason "description courtesy TheMovieSpoiler.com" Evans

[Cavlaw]

Elizabeth and her son are waiting on the cliffs above the sea 10 years later, and as the sun sets there is a green flash and the dutchman appears with Will Turner standing up on the rigging.

[Cavlaw]

As an aside, we just watched "Children of Men" and thought it was pretty cool.

[JasonEvans]

As an aside, we just watched "Children of Men" and thought it was pretty cool.

Good-- I'm glad you liked it. Some of those long, no-cut scenes were pretty amazing, eh?

-Jason "what did you think of the ending of Children?" Evans