I'm about half a year too late, but I've finally re-watched "POTC: Dead Man's Chest" and think there might be some in depth discussion to be had. In addition, more than a few of us anxiously await the third installment so here's a place for that chatter, too.
I saw P2 when it first was released and was massively unimpressed. I had built up a great deal of anticipation having loved the first one and found the second one unrelatable. It went on to be the biggest grossing movie of the year and one of the biggest of all time.
I had planned on waiting much longer to see it again, but was given a copy for Xmas and decided to jump right in. While I found it no more engaging this go, I did find it watchable. And having talked to many people who tell me it's better than the first I at least feel the movie, and the trilogy, deserves some deeper study.
My biggest complaint was, and is, that it's just too much action. There's really very little time to appreciate it because it jumps from frenetic scene to frenetic scene without stopping to let you absorb what's happened. A lot of bluster and not enough substance is my general feel. The music proves my point as, for the last half of the movie, it continually tries to up the ante over and over, which ends up feeling like white noise after a while. Danny Elfman used to be known for his over-the-top incidental music. In addition to the Batmobile having a rousing theme, it would come as no surprise to hear kettle drums and a full orchestra under Bruce Wayne shaving. Pirates at least has the action to fit the music, but enough is enough already. Without a break it soon leaves me numb.
After this second helping of the movie I ran into several problems. Perhaps they are easily explained and I missed something. I look forward to hearing anything I may have missed.
How do Pintel and Ragetti get to be back in the service of Jack on the Black Pearl? How did they survive the last movie and ally themselves with Jack?
How did Elizabeth become a warrior princess? How long is it between stories? A month? She can climb sails and wield weapons like Batman. This is more than tomboy behavior.
How can anyone accept Elizabeth's stupidity on the beach during the three-way swordfight?
At the end of the scene when Elizabeth falls for/seduces/manipulates Jack, the first words we hear are, "Land Ho!" Were the writers trying to tell us something about Ms. Swann?
How did the waterwheel with Norrington and Will get passed by Pintel, Ragetti, Elizabeth, and Davy Jones's men in the jungle to end up on the beach?
How does a gunpowder explosion big enough to mangle several Kraken tentacles leave Will, who was underneath, unscathed?
Was the shellhead pirate, who carried the box till he got beaned by a coconut, speaking Chinese? Is that foreshadowing for the third movie?
Why were the candle-holding people outside Tia Dalma's shack at the end of the movie? Were they bummed that Gandalf, I mean Jack, had perished? How did they know?
So clearly I care enough to think about the film. I just can't figure out these things on my own. Hopefully this will get some discussion to explain it to me because I'd just as soon enjoy this rather than be confounded by it.
I saw P2 when it first was released and was massively unimpressed. I had built up a great deal of anticipation having loved the first one and found the second one unrelatable. It went on to be the biggest grossing movie of the year and one of the biggest of all time.
I had planned on waiting much longer to see it again, but was given a copy for Xmas and decided to jump right in. While I found it no more engaging this go, I did find it watchable. And having talked to many people who tell me it's better than the first I at least feel the movie, and the trilogy, deserves some deeper study.
My biggest complaint was, and is, that it's just too much action. There's really very little time to appreciate it because it jumps from frenetic scene to frenetic scene without stopping to let you absorb what's happened. A lot of bluster and not enough substance is my general feel. The music proves my point as, for the last half of the movie, it continually tries to up the ante over and over, which ends up feeling like white noise after a while. Danny Elfman used to be known for his over-the-top incidental music. In addition to the Batmobile having a rousing theme, it would come as no surprise to hear kettle drums and a full orchestra under Bruce Wayne shaving. Pirates at least has the action to fit the music, but enough is enough already. Without a break it soon leaves me numb.
After this second helping of the movie I ran into several problems. Perhaps they are easily explained and I missed something. I look forward to hearing anything I may have missed.
How do Pintel and Ragetti get to be back in the service of Jack on the Black Pearl? How did they survive the last movie and ally themselves with Jack?
How did Elizabeth become a warrior princess? How long is it between stories? A month? She can climb sails and wield weapons like Batman. This is more than tomboy behavior.
How can anyone accept Elizabeth's stupidity on the beach during the three-way swordfight?
At the end of the scene when Elizabeth falls for/seduces/manipulates Jack, the first words we hear are, "Land Ho!" Were the writers trying to tell us something about Ms. Swann?
How did the waterwheel with Norrington and Will get passed by Pintel, Ragetti, Elizabeth, and Davy Jones's men in the jungle to end up on the beach?
How does a gunpowder explosion big enough to mangle several Kraken tentacles leave Will, who was underneath, unscathed?
Was the shellhead pirate, who carried the box till he got beaned by a coconut, speaking Chinese? Is that foreshadowing for the third movie?
Why were the candle-holding people outside Tia Dalma's shack at the end of the movie? Were they bummed that Gandalf, I mean Jack, had perished? How did they know?
So clearly I care enough to think about the film. I just can't figure out these things on my own. Hopefully this will get some discussion to explain it to me because I'd just as soon enjoy this rather than be confounded by it.
