No surprise that Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End will be this Memorial Day weekend's movie to see. And for those who suffered through last year's Dead Man's Chest, it'll also be no surprise to learn that the final entry in this theme park ride-inspired franchise is a big, noisy, convoluted mess.
I'm now officially sick of this summer's festival-of-threequels.
Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End (Slant magazine)
Steel City (Slant magazine)
Four Lane Highway (Slant magazine)
Fido (Slant magazine)
Pirates 1: * * *
Pirates 2: * *
Pirates 3: *
Funny really, cause the first one was pretty decent - this one is staggeringly awful.
Posted by: Andres | May 26, 2007 at 02:32 PM
Most of us Slanters seem to be passive contrarians (unlike certain critics who actually have agendas and wear them on their sleeves), but I swear I've no clue how I liked this third one - it's like I'm a contrarian, squared. Maybe it was just a really special (not in a good way) viewing - a second, pre-promised screening with the little bro will confirm or deny this - but I definitely dug it's spectacle, and thought it carved out a really fun and unpretentious niche in the what-you-see-is-what-you-get realm of cinema. This was all the more surprising to me since I thought the second one sucked.
So yeah. I feel in the minority here, but at least I only LIKED it...not a year-end-best movie by any stretch. And I sure won't be offended by seeing it on any year-end-worst lists, either. :)
Posted by: rob | May 27, 2007 at 01:06 AM
Makes sense, Rob, though I doubt it's going to show up Bottom 10 lists, unless people blatantly miss junk like Epic Movie and Stomp the Yard. (In which case, lucky them!)
Posted by: J | May 27, 2007 at 09:59 PM
Here I am going to have to say that this thing is definitely going to make the Bottom 10. Worst part is, I really tried to like it, but not even Sparrow's quirkiness could save me from truly scowling at it.
Posted by: Andres | May 28, 2007 at 03:04 PM
I'm quite excited to see it a second time...not so much because I liked it (which, again, I did - movie critic identity crisis here, people!), but because I want to see if it was a fluke or not.
I must say, though - even if I end up HATING it, I think that Jack Sparrow's whole Davy-Jones-locker-crabs-hallucination scene will still be among my favorite scenes of the year. I think it's the closest a mainstream summer movie has ever come to being Lynchian, even if for only ten minutes.
Posted by: rob | May 28, 2007 at 09:51 PM
It sounds to me like you need to grow some confidence, Rob. Didn't you just recently give Zombie 3 **1/2? This is small potatoes in comparison. =P
Posted by: dennis | May 29, 2007 at 12:48 AM
I understand loving something LIKE Pirates 3 - I certainly like my fair share of critically disparaged films - but in this case, I just wanted to strangle myself by the umpteenth secret-handshake deal.
Plus, Orlando Bloom may be the single blandest actor of this generation. He just puts me to sleep.
However, I do agree, Rob, that the two hallucinatory scenes with Depp were quite good. I especially liked the early compositions of Depp outside the desert ship - those were the only moments in which Verbinski seemed to actually employ calm, (reasonably) static compositions to humorous effect.
Posted by: Nick | May 29, 2007 at 07:31 AM
Thank you for your words, Dennis, but I did mean my "identity crisis" comment as being somewhat tongue-in-cheek (in the flamboyant queen sense of the word). I think we've all had our share of arguments in which we're lambasted for liking this or disliking that (Miami Vice and The Constant Gardener, in my case). After a while you just stop caring, and part of why I've grown to love the Slant community (even before becoming a contributor) was the acceptance extended by all of its members.
Posted by: rob | May 29, 2007 at 11:35 AM
Rob, fear not. I've just put myself out on a critical plank with my take on it over at The House. I think it's a pretty smart movie, actually, despite Orlando Bloom and Keira Knightley. I mean, yes, Orlando is pure puff the magic dragon vapors but Keira actually has some spunk I like; plus, she's aging well, and in certain shots looks devastatingly attractive, if, in others, she looks like a twiggy, pouty brat. Anyways, stand tall and proud. I think it's okay to have some fun with the thing. That's what it's meant for, after all. And Davy Jones falling into Calypso's vortex? How cool is that?
Sorry it made you feel so low, Nick. Perhaps, in time, you may be able to surrender to its silliness.
Oh yeah: The Constant Gardner DOES suck.
Posted by: Ryland Knight | May 29, 2007 at 03:00 PM
I thought everybody hated The Constant Gardener... If not, they should. :P
Posted by: J | May 30, 2007 at 04:23 AM
I wish it were sillier, Ryland - throughout, it just felt so sluggish and overstuffed and forced that I couldn't get into it. But hey, glad to hear someone is enjoying a big-budget summer movie (and btw, good piece over at The House).
I'd say The Constant Gardener was Satan, except I don't want to disparage Satan like that.
Posted by: Nick | May 30, 2007 at 12:14 PM
I don't get the hate for The Constant Gardener, and I've read the most negative reviews for it. Don't get me wrong, I believe it was rather mediocre as a whole, but terrible? One of the worst of '05? I dunno, I don't get it.
Posted by: Dennis | May 30, 2007 at 02:56 PM
Yeah, After two viewings of it I still can't see anything too bad...although it certainly isn't some sort of bona-fide masterpiece, it has its share of good scenes.
Posted by: Andres Zambrano | May 30, 2007 at 05:27 PM
Thanks, Nick. Well, at least we can agree the lazy platforming and obnoxious camera of CG was mostly, if not wholly, offensive.
Posted by: Ryland Knight | May 30, 2007 at 08:24 PM