As a standalone film, this was better than "On Stranger Tides" due to it's more charismatic villains, it's superior action sequences, superior effects and better jokes.
Unfortunately this was not a standalone film, but a sequel. The wasted plots and even worse, continuity errors, just killed this movie for me.
Will Turner is apparently not captain of the Dutchman anymore, can't control is crew or broke up with his wife. No, wait, she clearly wants to see him, so that can't be it. If someone defeated him or something, that's not something to gloss over...just bad use of continuity!
Captain Barbosa has Queen Anne's revenge, the Ship Of The Line version with a flamethrower! Burn that Silent Mary to cinders, at least try to. He said that his own ship turned against him when Blackbeard came, so try that at least!
That scene where Jack becomes captain for the first time, that was awesome, and explains why he would risk giving away the compass later, he wasn't told exactly how it works...except he was told exactly how it worked when he got it from the sea goddess Calypso itself. Awesome sailing sequences don't make up for the fact this flashback should be impossible!
Salazar says he only kills pirates, even though the first people we see him kill belong to the British Royal Navy. Hell, maybe he just considers all British sailors pirates, since the nation sent privateers after Spanish ships, but you know what, I didn't think that until hours later. If that was really his reasoning, telling or showing it would have been helpful!
When Jack looked into the bottle during the last movie one of the cannons was firing on the Black Pearl, were we really supposed to believe the monkey was the only thing living on it?
Still, with a climax like that I can't truly hate this movie. Dislike it a bit, yes. Vow to watch no more movies in this series maybe. But I had fun.
Buldogue's lawyerThe whole Sink the Lifeboats bit didn't do him any Karmic favors.
edited 10th Jun '17 10:14:24 PM by Gaon
"All you Fascists bound to lose."Well if you can't accept Pirates as characters worth of some sympathy, you've come to the wrong franchise.
Even in real history, I would consider this sort of Sink the Lifeboats tactic Salazar uses as a villainous measure. Historical pirates were a complex bunch, because it's easy to forget 17th century piracy came about, in several ways, over the absolute dystopian nightmare of torture and overwork that was ship conditions in most navies around the world, specially the British. There was also a basic problem of mass unemployment of people after having plenty of jobs as Corsairs during the War of Spanish Succession and such.
Pirates were also pioneers of Republicanism and multicultural government in the Americas, with the Republic of Nassau (the fabled Republic of Pirates), often considered the first Republic of the New World. Pirate crews in general were a lot more democratic and multicultural than the deeply segregated and authoritarian model of the British Navy.
Of course, pirates were thieves, murderers and often worse, but it's not like either the British, Spanish or French Empires were saints and their misdeeds were crucial to the rise of piracy. Their morality also depended on the pirate. Black Sam Bellamy, "the Prince of Thieves", was by all accounts a pretty civilized who never harmed his prisoners, same for Ben Hornigold. But then you had guys like Charles Vane and François l'Olonnais who were rampaging seafaring psychopaths.
I don't hold historical pirates as role models, there's a overall Gray-and-Gray Morality involved in the whole pirate age conflict. There's also a very pragmatic reason: Deciding to slaughter pirate crews who surrender is more likely to cause the surviving pirates to be even more ruthless in retaliation and it'll mean none of them will ever surrender and will fight to the bitter end, causing even more waste of resources and life.
The man who actually single-handedly brought down the end of the Pirate Age in the Caribbean, the good and ol' Woodes Rogers, did so not by conducting a genocidal warpath. His trick was offering pardons left and right to divide the pirates and using his governance to actually improve Nassau, building better infrastructure and successfully curing the island of a Malaria outbreak. Woodes Rogers ended piracy primarily by being a fair governor, not killing them all (which is a fool's errand).Mind you he killed plenty of them, but his main trick was being merciful and tolerant of pirates rather than treating them as subhuman.
In fact Woodes Rogers was pretty much the mirror opposite to Salazar as presented in this movie.
edited 11th Jun '17 9:09:59 AM by Gaon
"All you Fascists bound to lose."Also, pirates in this series are explicitly written like rockstars, and anyone who tries to stop them (minus Norringtom, who even so is noted to have "chosen the wrong side") is The Man.
edited 11th Jun '17 7:19:31 PM by KnownUnknown
Eh, not really. The first movie's very second-to-last dialogue is Governor Swann saying "He's a blacksmith" (referring to Will) and Elizabeth responds with "No. He's a Pirate." as romantic music swells up and they kiss, implying Will's hypothetical newfound piracy is a overwhelmingly heroic trait.In general Will learning Jack's trickery in Curse is treated as unambiguously positive.
Even Barbossa is not wholly despicable in the first film. The director's commentary for Curse actually says a few times how they always thought Barbossa and his crew were meant to be somewhat sympathetic in their quest to regain humanity and they're not wholly monstrous (for instance, Barbossa is rather civil towards Elizaebth, kidnapping aside, and he frees Jack's crew unharmed despite having no actual incentive to do so). Thus why Barbossa gets a Alas, Poor Villain in his final moments.
Even in the second and third film, the series still maintains a fairly sober outlook of pirates being thieving, scheming scoundrels (as noted by Jack's, Barbossa's and Sao Feng's continuous dickery). It's just that the East India Trading Company is a genocidal band of Imperialists so the pirates are the good guys almost by definition.
The first four films have a curious perspective of piracy. They idolize the ideals of piracy, the freedom and independence of it, but are also very clear on how Pirates themselves tend to be assholes. Stranger Tides even had Blackbeard, a unambiguously evil Pirate.
The only film that is really a-ok with Pirates and never raises any semblance of a critique is Dead Men Tell No Tales.
edited 11th Jun '17 9:41:12 PM by Gaon
"All you Fascists bound to lose."I didn't pay money to see this in a public space where there was nothing to do but watch the movie, so it didn't seem as bad as I was expecting, watched out the corner of my eye. It did seem oddly joyless and workmanlike, but there were a few setpieces that I can see being pretty cool in the concept art— the way Salazar's gutted ship crawls up and eats the British ship like a centipede, the design of the Spaniards in general, the Pearl skimming the edge of the parted sea and pulling everyone up by that anchor.
The trouble is that various more interesting ideas are obscured by resorting back to rote pandering, which has always been a problem for this series. The bank heist ends up being a cheap knockoff of a similar scene from Tintin, which could have been all the more impressive for being largely practical, but ends up being shot so indifferently. That Jack and by extension Johnny Depp no longer care about the proceedings of the series seems a little too on the nose, and while I like Javier Bardem and liked him better than I ever expected to based on the lack of originality in using that character, he was still just kind of there— I have a sneaking suspicion that David Wenham is mostly in the movie because he was originally going to have Bardem's part all to himself, but was bumped when they got a somewhat bigger name for the posters.
So yeah. I's a mess, but not as frustratingly overcrowded as At World's End. It lacks the skill that made On Stranger Tides a worthwhile attempt. It doesn't have the wheel fight, which was a good enough reason to make Dead Man's Chest all on its own. And it killed off Barbossa, who had sneakily made this franchise his own. Maybe he'd come back, maybe he wants to retire, but the mere fact that this movie didn't realize this was his story until about halfway through makes it a far weaker film than if it had been positioned as his story, his last kick at the can from the very beginning.
edited 19th Oct '17 6:40:36 PM by Unsung
So I watched it.
I didn't think it was bad, but it's nothing great.
It should be safe to put this up without spoilers, but I use them anyway:
So why did they even need the Trident to break Will's curse? Wasn't it supposed to be possible via Elizabeth being faithful for ten years (which she clearly was)?
...wow. I thought I'd have more to say, but beyond The Stinger (and the question of how there will be a final movie, as all the important plot threads of the previous movies have been dealt with) there doesn't seem to be much to really talk about.
...someone should have nicked one of those aztec coins just in case, considering how things went down...but then again, that curse is probably gone too.
One Strip! One Strip!
No. The deal is not and never has been said or suggested to be "contract on the Dutchman expires after ten years."
It has always been "Captain of the Dutchman can step on land once every decade."
Calypso's unfaithfulness and Davy Jones' subsequent failure to fulfill his duties and betrayal of her to the Brethren Court are seperate issues.
edited 20th Oct '17 8:40:19 PM by TheAirman
PSN ID: FateSeraph | Switch friendcode: SW-0145-8835-0610 Congratulations! She/TheyWhat sources are those? The movies are pretty straight forward about it all.
PSN ID: FateSeraph | Switch friendcode: SW-0145-8835-0610 Congratulations! She/TheyOh right. I remember now.
I guess I confused how things worked because of Calypso and Jones. That being said, I'd be pissed too if the one time I could actually walk on land, the person I was supposed to meet wasn't even there.
And yeah, I recall it being mentioned earlier in this very thread that the next movie will end it, though I don't see what's left to do [[spoiler: even with thatstinger with Jones), but we'll see.
One Strip! One Strip!As a standalone film, it was pretty bad. It was lazy. Lazy stereotypes. Lazy humor. Sparrow is now Bart "I didn't do it!" Simpson. The only thing I was mildly interested in was Barbossa, and the ending of his story arc was interesting. Bardem was utterly wasted.
Every film diminishes the Sparrow from the first film. He's going from Sparrow to Willy Wonka. At least Rush's Large Ham performance was being a stereotypical "arrrrrrrrrrrr" pirate, so when he has small moments of humanity, it's that much more impressive.
When was the last time Sparrow behaved like a regular person? The last time I can think of is when he promises to be a gentlemen to Elizabeth, twirling his mustache upward.
edited 26th Oct '17 9:08:38 AM by AnotherGuy
"Eh, not really. The first movie's very second-to-last dialogue is Governor Swann saying "He's a blacksmith" (referring to Will) and Elizabeth responds with "No. He's a Pirate." as romantic music swells up and they kiss, implying Will's hypothetical newfound piracy is a overwhelmingly heroic trait.In general Will learning Jack's trickery in Curse is treated as unambiguously positive. "
Hell, will ENTIRE arc in that movie is him realizng he is the son of a pirate and that is a good thing, he is shy guy who deep down is awsome, compare to that every other no pirate scene is show as boring.
"My Name is Bolt, Bolt Crank and I dont care if you believe or not"Will's arc in the first movie is learning that you can be daring and break the rules (not specifically become a pirate) and still do good. Presumably between the first and second movies he doesn't stop becoming a blacksmith, but I wouldn't be surprised if we're supposed to assume he used his character development to tell his boss from the first movie to stuff it and strike out on his own or something.
He's basically being taught by a pirate not how to be a pirate, but how to come into his own. By the end of the movie he rejects what everyone is telling him he should be - both the law and Jack - for a more Screw the Rules, I'm Doing What's Right! mentality of his own, which is where Elizabeth's metaphorical "he's a pirate" comes from: yadda yadda yadda freedom and such.
edited 27th Oct '17 3:20:28 AM by KnownUnknown
![]()
Oversimplifying, I'd say. This is set up as a When justice is outlawed The just must become outlaws sort of situation— except sub out justice for freedom. The side of authority isn't inherently good, especially when said authority is mostly made up the East India Company and colonial Europe. For the lack of a better option, those who would rail against tyranny become pirates...along with all the people who just want their chance at amassing many, many pieces-of-eight, or an excuse to hack people up with a cutlass. The side of freedom isn't inherently good either, and the movies also demonstrate.
, more or less.

Jack probably would've worked if, back in Stranger Tides, they went full hog in making a movie about a new protagonist on a new swashbuckling adventure, and had Jack and/or Barbossa be supporting characters rather than protags.