I think the biggest problem with Pirates 2 is how every one hyped it up as if it were the second coming of cinema. Seriously, even before it was released people acted like it was going to be one of the GREATEST MOVIES EVER. Let’s be honest for a second, the first Pirates is entertaining, but it is far from great.
The filmmakers had no idea what they had with the first film, so it’s not surprising that it was more character/story driven than the second film. However, once it became a hit, the filmmakers had a find away to appeal to the core of fans in the second film. Hence, more action, more special effects, more ill-defined characters and a longer running time and that it’s only half the actual movie. Fans will have to wait another year to see the third film.
I personally found the chracters in the second film rather unlikable, almost childish at times, like the three way swordfight between Jack Sparrow, Will and Norrington. Not only is it drawn out, but it’s hard to root for any of the characters. Meanwhile, Elizabeth is throwing rocks and screaming at them in half assed attempt to get them to stop. It was a rather obnoxious sequence, which got lots of “forced” laughter from the audience.

I find it insulting that people are comparing this to The Empire Strikes Back. Empire took it’s time in developing characters and establishing relationships. It is a rather restrained and subdued sequel to Star Wars. It’s characters is what keeps it grounded; the story never gets lost in the special effects. Where as Pirates II, it’s really hard to give a damn what’s happening onscreen, because you are being bombard every five seconds with some bit of action.

First off, the movie is a sequel. It couldn’t be a standalone. Therefore it’s confusing to anyone who didn’t have a working knowledge of the first movie, because the movie assumes you know all the players. I’m not making excuses, but sequels have that burden. THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK, one of the gold standards of the movie sequels in my opinion, suffers similarly when compared to STAR WARS. EMPIRE goes from Luke’s story in STAR WARS to a concern about Han’s fate at the end of EMPIRE. Both Han and Sparrow are the devil may care swashbucklers… The comparison falls apart after that, but the shift in focus to another character in the trio from one movie to the other in the sequel isn’t a brand new idea.

There’s no question that POTC2 is much like a videogame, and the lack of slow moments for character development in the middle did hurt this movie, but I only think that harmed the development of Davy Jones’ character — not so much the rest of the crew. The whole island of cannibals could have been excised from the movie with the blink of an eye and noone would have been the wiser. That part alone seemed like a section that looks like it would be hard to beat in some videogame. So, yes, this movie seemed more like a videogame than movies based on them.

But POTC2 shined when asked to perform what it was supposed to do: Put Jack Sparrow in danger, and have fun watching him scramble out of it. For a “popcorn flick”, this did the job. No longing and meaningful looks of love, no long embraces, just action. How often does a movie billed as an action flick perform exactly as just that? An ACTION FLICK? POTC2 certainly had more stunts than the last few James Bond movies. This is the reason the movie did so well at the box office in spite of the ratings. No doubt in my mind.

But yes, plot to tie the pieces together? Seriously lacking. That the McGuffin is a living beating heart? Love the idea! Explaining how that heart would be so powerful? Oh, hell no. Nobody understood that. When comparing McGuffins to each other, try making a list of “popcorn movies” and the thing the characters are chasing after. Now, look at the sequels to the successful ones. What’s the big chase after in Mission Impossible III? What’s the rabbit’s foot? Is it mere laziness on the part of the writers not to have actually explained what the item is? At least in POTC2 there’s several unique ideas, and those ideas are up on the screen.

So, I’m not so much defending the POTC2 so much as claiming that as a sequel, it certainly surpassed the job it was given: Get the audiences in the theater and tell them a story that has a great ending, and at the same time get them ready for the next story.

As much as I loved THE INCREDIBLES, I’m pretty convinced that there’s a story there worth a sequel. THE MATRIX, as we all well know, should have been a stand alone movie simply because the story that came afterward in the next two installments was crap. ALIENS, on the other hand, had a few stories and great action. You’ve mentioned TERMINATOR. The first three STAR WARS (IV, V, and IV) were terrific — story and action. LOTR was already a set story where one couldn’t be without the other two. And of course, HARRY POTTER, the most interesting with regards to sequels because you’re dealing with young actors over a span of years.

As with all movies, time will tell.

The real judge and jury was not at the midnight show.

They are the millions of casual moviegoers who are not making any noise online. You know why? They don’t have time to waste typing apology letters for why this movie sucked. They just moved on. But trust me, there were a LOT of dissappointed looks on the faces of those casual moviegoers.

These folks represent a huge majority of the people that will see this film (probably a good 90 percent). Trust me, they won’t see it again.

What struck me about the post-movie reactions was the look af sheer boredom and utter confusion on the kids’ faces. I actually felt deeply for them. They were probably anticipating this movie more than anyone. This film is just too chatty and complicated for the younguns. They seriously looked let down. Poor kids…

Anyhow, this is a pirate movie. I shouldn’t feel mentally fatigued by films’ end. I did.

How can a movie like Pi be less mentally fatiguing than a pirate movie? In the case of Pirates 2, this is the case. It’s been 4 days…I’m still tired. Jesus.

The only problem is that I don’t really like it when people compare today’s “Hollywood” with some idealistic image of the past. Was there ever really a time when even a slim majority of the films being produced were worth watching?

I don’t think so–No matter what year you look at, 95% of the movies released at that time were/are complete turds. It’s the good ones we remember and it’s why we still watch the Indian Jones’ and Princess Bride’s and forget all the junk we had to wade through to get to them. In a decade, people will pass movies like the PotC, the Incredibles and Kung Fu Hustle on to their children like treasured heirlooms, while the forgetable crap like Pirates 2 will be… well, forgotten.

I just had fun. I don’t need to analyze it. It’s the most fun I’ve had at the movies this year. More fun than Superman, X-Men 3 or Cars, easily (and I loved all three of those).

It was also incredibly well made. In that regard, the only films I thought came close so far this year were Cars, Superman and V For Vendetta, and I’ll give POTC2 the edge over all of ‘em.

Were I to really sit and analyze it, sure, I could probably think of a few places where it could have been trimmed and shortened a bit. But it didn’t “feel” long to me while I was watching it. Certainly, Superman felt longer, as did last year’s Revenge of the Sith and Batman Begins (both of which I also really liked).

I do tend to have a fondness for middle chapters. In addition to “Empire,” I liked The Two Towers best out of the LOTR films and Back to the Future 2 is my favorite in that series. I’d probably also give Aliens a nod over Alien (though both are great) and T2 over The Terminator. And heck, though I enjoyed X-Men 3 far more than I expected to, X2 is still the superior film in that series, in my book.

I am among those who honestly cannot understand how someone could enjoy the first film and not enjoy this one. I don’t think it is bloated nor was the action non-stop. There were plenty of calm moments between chases, fights, etc. that allowed one to enjoy the great look and feel of this film.

As for the person who despises cliffhangers in films I have to say that, when done right (as I believe this one is) they are great. Empire is arguably the best Star Wars film and it was one giant cliffhanger. I actually thought this one had a very fun ending that still manages to set up the 3rd film very well.

I joyfully lump myself in with those who enjoyed this one and look forward to seeing it again.

I admit to being a stickler for story, since it is the basis of all of the classics.

>>>What is this, High School Creative Writing 101?

But what is the alternative? Is there really no value in subtext? I reject that notion.

I admit that I may be out of touch with the generations raised on video games and so on, but I submit that POTC 1 was a SURPRISE hit because of those story elements — otherwise it would have been like VAN HELSING, which was a costly flop.

The new, post 2000 movie franchises that HAVE worked have all been based on other media — LoTR, Harry Potter, X-Men, Spidey, Narnia. These other media are story-based and that is the secret of their appeal.

It’s no accident that POTC 2 suddenly got all serious in the last part. It’s the last part and its story hooks that will sell the third installment, with its exotic amputees and Keith Richards and Capt. Jack Sparrow frozen in his block of carbonite.

More to the point, what bad Hobbiton weed are you smoking?? I thought this second Pirates was a lot more inventively fun than the first. All that “emotional core” stuff you were basing the goodness of the original were just a series of agonizing cliches. Elizabeth being forced to marry a rich, snotty(of course) Englishman when she’s in love with the poor, honest (of course) Will was a serious statement against social restrictions? Seriously, you’re joking, right? The Black Pearl symbolizing “freedom” is what gave that movie “substance”? What is this, High School Creative Writing 101?

I LIKED that the second film was devoid of such cringe-inducing, juvenile attempts at “meaning”. It’s a movie about PIRATES, fer christ’s sake! If I want “meaning” I’ll just go read Joyce. Sure, the movie’s uneven and long, and even boring in parts, but when it delievered, it really delivered. Yup, I agree with you that it’s no RAIDERS, but for a pirate movie, it was a damn good time.

As for PIRATES 2 though… I think it’s fitting that you use the term “video game” more than once in your summation as that is precisely how my friend and I referred to the action in the film last night. As for characterless-driven action, unfortunately that’s true. The actors were just bodies that moved around on screen for our entertainment instead of characters. The “silliness” of the action didn’t bother me because I just wanted to see something fun and interesting up on the screen. While I believe the script had problems, there was something more going on than mere action for the sake of action.

There’s actually lots going on regarding how one’s fate is dictated by the allegiances we make. Not only that there’s plenty discussion about how we take an active role in our destiny by which side we choose, or perhaps how we negotiate which side we’re on. Now these themes were not fully played out because there was such a lack of character exposition in this sequel. I also have doubts about how that will be played out in the final installment.

In the end, despite my let-down by “the man’s” interpretation of this second episode in the series, I still had fun watching the movie. Yes, there was actually *too much* of Johnny Depp’s quirks and staggers and mumbling. Yes, the action became decidedly less realistic and much more senseless. But….yes, it was entertaining. Do I think the appeal of pirates and sea-faring can be shown on screen as well as they can in Patrick O’Brien novels? No, I don’t. As cool as pirates are (and we all know that they are), it seems they’re destined to be portrayed best in my childhood’s favorite of all media: Legos.

I understand that your loved the action movies of the 70’s-80’s but it seemed reading this that you think it’s the standard, and that because pirates didn’t have a “emotional-dramatic” core that it felt flat. could it be that you just dont like that these movies are not catered to you anymore and more to a “impulse generation” that prefers style over substance?

it just seemed like your like the old woman/man who says: “‘member back in the day when this was good, now it’s f’ed up”

i agree w/ you todays movies I feel lack those things that it seems only spielberg can connect to now, but CGI is the way now, and not puppets. and before you cruify that movement you should really investigate why screenwriters seem to want to have CGI piled on movies. I never asked for the kraken in prirates, but they wanted to put the “amazing” in movies. you bash the instrument, without bashing the people who weilds it.

all in all you did make me think, and thats always good. but does CD’s lack the soul of vinyl records, do live-action puppets bring more real-life moments than CGI. it’s the future, and the future always create people who are afraid and stubborn of it.

Is it movie gold? No. But then I’ve not seen movie gold in a while. Superman wasn’t. Batman wasn’t - and sorry Heidi - but Terminator 2 was utterly f***ing awful.

Would I see it again? Sure. It passed the time, had some witty moments. But it was a film for the MTV generation.

Horses for courses.

Elizabeth’s arc is clearly the heart of the first and the most interesting element of the second film and POTC2 failed by getting caught up in Jack’s redemption (which really should have waited for the third film anyway).

I also like the really fantastical elements. The big treasure is an actual dismembered, still-beating heart and the ultimate evil is really the East India Trading Co. I don’t know. Maybe these guys have too much story to tell, but I don’t think they’re being influenced by evil movie executives. The movie is much too weird for that.

Also, I just want to say that Batman Begins sucked.

BATMAN BEGINS was a good cop dama until it ended as a kid flick with a fight in a high location, as most Batman movies [wrongly] do… they can’t help themselves.

INCREDIBLES was great… but not that much. it’s still the best FANTASTIC FOUR movie ever made, though.

PIRATES 1: great! 2 I haven’t seen yet, as I haven’t SUPERSON CHRIS REEVES NEVER KNEW HE HAD.

And I’m most disappointed, as I usually am in these instances, but the script. Elliott and Rossio know what they’re doing; The Mask of Zorro is one of my favorite throw-back adventure films of the last 15 years. Because it all does come from the story.

And you know why there are no good Pirate movies? Because it’s a world you have to live in. Not visit for 2 hours.