Pirates of the Caribbean 2

Post by **Payndar Circusdorf** » Sat Jul 08, 2006 1:50 am

Good flick. Go see it.

Post by **Hkat** » Sat Jul 08, 2006 7:43 am

LOL!

It's amazing...when it comes to bashing a film, Payn can go on for paragraphs. When he enjoys a movie, it gets 5 words.

Post by **Payndar Circusdorf** » Sat Jul 08, 2006 9:38 am

Enh, it was 2 AM when I posted.

IF you liked POTC 1, you will like this one. If you didn't like POTC 1, you won't care about a review.

But, I would like to go on record and say that digital projectors are fucking beautiful.

Post by **Mikren** » Sat Jul 08, 2006 1:17 pm

I have a few complaints about it, but overall it was a pretty goo movie.

Post by **Payndar Circusdorf** » Sun Jul 09, 2006 11:27 am

Lisa Shwartzbaum needs to take her hormone pills and quit giving out D+'s in her review for Entertainment Weekly. That is an absurdly low rating, that makes me think she didn't even see the movie.

Post by **Hkat** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 3:24 pm

I think the monkey was under played. = / A novelty trinket like that either needs more air time, or none at all.

Post by **Kabol** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 8:52 am

I was not a big fan of this movie. It was too long and incoherent. The characters lacked all of the depth they had in the first movie. While I am comparing it to the first movie, they totally changed the tone for the worse.

I guess by itself (or compared to sequels in general) the movie was OK, perhaps worth the price of admission. The first movie had a better plot, a better villain, a better love story, better fight scenes, and a much better Jack Sparrow.

Oh, and a way better ending.

edit: In the sequel's favor, Keira Knightley was hotter.

Post by **Ves** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 9:18 am

I have to agree with Kabol. The last 30minutes I just kept checking my watch for when I could leave. This is the first movie that I have been too since Harry Potter last year, it wasn't worth getting my ass up.

Post by **Wiccor Basquet** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 10:05 am

I agree with Kabol as well. This movie was ok, but I was just expecting so much more as I really enjoyed the first movie. If you want to hear another review of the movie, check out what the ninja had to say.

http://www.askaninja.com/

Post by **Ves** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 11:13 am

Wiccor Basquet wrote:I agree with Kabol as well. This movie was ok, but I was just expecting so much more as I really enjoyed the first movie. If you want to hear another review of the movie, check out what the ninja had to say.

http://www.askaninja.com/

Lol, when me and my wife were leaving the theater I expressed how unimpressed I was. She made the comment that I would have loved it if it was "Ninja's of the Caribbean."

Comintern · Post by **Comintern** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 1:16 pm

Kabol wrote:The characters lacked all of the depth they had in the first movie. .

Perhaps it is because Im an "uneducated" wage slave, but Im not getting this comment.

lacked the depth they had in the first one.
did you want them to get deeper into their characters?
rethink the depth and bring a new depth to it?

or we to just assume that the characters in the second movie are entirely different characters and therefore, need to have their orginal Depth reapplied?

or, could one just sit there, remember how they were in the first one and realize that this is the same character?

I may have missed the whole point entirely, but Im not sure.

Ultimately I didnt have a problem parting with the 7 bucks to see this movie. I Thoroughly enjoyed Davy Jones and the CGI.
but Ill agree, Jack Sparrow was missing a step in this movie.

Post by **Maz** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 1:33 pm

I agree with Kabol

Post by **Kabol** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 1:48 pm

Comintern wrote: lacked the depth they had in the first one.
did you want them to get deeper into their characters?
rethink the depth and bring a new depth to it?

or we to just assume that the characters in the second movie are entirely different characters and therefore, need to have their orginal Depth reapplied?

or, could one just sit there, remember how they were in the first one and realize that this is the same character?

The first movie did a good job of setting up why characters behave they way they do (except Jack Sparrow, but unpredictability IS his main trait). You had the nice intro to show Elizabeth's infatuation with pirates.

You saw that William as an excellent blacksmith, who followed through with his work, and hid the fact that his boss was a drunk. He hated pirates and practiced with the swords he made every day.

In the sequel Elizabeth is real fucking handy with a sword, where did that come from? I seem to know they trust Jack Sparrow because they say it every 15 minutes. Meanwhile, he does nothing but betray them for reasons I felt were inconsistent with his attitude in the first movie.

I don't want to get into fucking book report detail here but every new character is shallow, especially Davy Jones. Barbosa's apple fetish and his dinner speech to Elizabeth was "deeper" than whatever they threw at me about the heart of Davy Jones and his lost love or whatever the fuck that was about.

Will's dad? Witch Lady? Shallow and shallow. How about when they throw norrington at you out of the blue? The fact that he is destitute is subtly shoved down your throat by tossing him out of a bar and into pig shit. His reasoning for wanting the heart seemed pretty fucking contrived given his character in the last movie.

And don't even get me started on the whole Elizabeth and Jack love interest. It was almost as superflous as them bringing back Dumb and Dumber (Pintel and Ragetti were their names, apparently).

Anyway, I said the movie was (perhaps) worth the price of admission. It has all of the elements of a good summer block buster.

Forgive me if I was not intrigued for a whole 140 minutes by a midget pirate, undead monkey, and a swordfight atop a giant water wheel.

Edit: I don't mean to come down hard on this movie while explaining my points to Parker. Plenty of decent movies suffer these flaws (or worse ones). It was not an Oceans 12. I would classify it more with Independance Day. I didn't mind watching it at the time, but I am not going out of my way to see it again.

Post by **Payndar Circusdorf** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 11:57 pm

Kabol wrote:I would classify it more with Independance Day.

That's fucking harsh.

Post by **Ves** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 9:22 am

At least he didn't bring up "The Core".