The first shot from the THIRD film???? (A bigger shot is here.)

The rumored subtitle is World's End, judging from the accompanying text.

Is it me, or does looking at Depp's face make it seem that the shot is Photoshopped?

"Is it me, or does looking at Depp's face make it seem that the shot is Photoshopped?" - LN

Yes, yes it does... hopefully those disney graphics won't affect the great effects shown in the pixar films.

Keith Richards all but confirmed for Pirates 3.

First poster!

Wonderful. I wanted to post a link to a pic of Keith Richards as Captain Grant Sparrow, but I couldn't use the newurl tag, because the site says the post links to "too many sites". I have no idea what this means, since it was a link to exactly one site. I then tried just pasting the url by itself without formating it into a link, and the post failed for the same reason.

Let's try this:

Type the double-u, double-u, double-u part of the url. Then type: iwatchstuff.com/2006/12/keith_richards_as_pirate_of_ca.html. Hopefully that'll work.

Poster images of the cast.

I like

Glad to see you've made it through to the site, Josh.

Jack looks like.. um... JAck...

Lizzy swann looks like the movie should be called:

"Crouching Pirate, Hidden Treasure"

And CHOW YUN FAT!!

How excited am I now...?

Trailer out... wowee zowee! Even though some element of it doesn't grab me as much as the other two did, this looks like one sweet ride- awesome shots of...

SPOILERS





Jack and Davy Jones fighting on a yard arm- possibly the best part of the trailer!

Giant whirlpool and waterfall at world's edge.

Jack, looking much like Wilem, the man who was part of the Dutchman's hull from Dead Man's Chest- presumeably when he is in Davy Jones Locker.

Some great lines, especially the "Four of you tried to kill me... and one of you suceeded!"



(END SPOILERS)


This looks like it will be a much darker film, and a pretty big one- will they manage to top the spectacle of Dead Man's Chest without becoming lost in a blizzard of Star Wars Prequel-esque Glitz-without-the-heart mentality? We shall see how it turns out!

Hi-quality Keira Knightley pics.

isn't that High quality? Hi is short for hello...

"isn't that High quality? Hi is short for hello..."

Picky picky picky.

Geez, what is it with you people?

Shouldn't "isn't" be capitalized as it begins your sentence? Don't correct others if you can't live up to your own "high" standards.

Well, I assume he was joking, especially given the handle he chose for himself.

Geez, what is it with you people?

I don't know what it is with other people as I am not people... at least I think I'm not... am I? Yes we are, so shut up, and go away...


and yes, I was joking as Luigi assumed.

If you were joking, then I'm sorry. I just get so tired of people picking on others spelling and grammer, belittling others to make ones self feel superior. It makes some not want to post at all.

Good wrap-up, although you really could have taken this and the previous film, kicked out some extraneous junk, and made it one, tidily long movie.

SPOILERS

*The ending to this movie absolutely makes it worthwhile, but there is a LOOOOONG build-up to it (the voyage to the Land of the Dead is fine, but from there to the end is slow going). The ending, though, wow...an absolutely slam-dunk action sequence.

*As usual in Pirates films, almost every character betrays each other at one point or another--it seems a little forced at times here, and we struggle a touch to understand all the characters' motivations.

*Sadly, Hollander never really makes it as a villain. We don't really get his big plan (does he have one?) and he has no truly villainous scenes. Davy Jones, by default, becomes the central villain of the movie.

*Speaking of Mr. Jones, his plot gets kind of shafted. He has that touching scene with Calypso, but then that's about it and from then on he's just a big meanie again.

*What was with Chow-yun Fat insisting that Elizabeth was Calypso? It comes off as an oddball red herring, but he seems pretty darn sure.

*The deaths in this film are pretty much expected. I actually thought that the body count would be higher. The final "death" in the film is a clever idea which I actually hope serves to write him out of the film series. It's a touching concept.

*The acting in the film is pretty good. Bloom gets short shrift on screen time this go-around, but has a bit of panache unseen last time. Knightley is fine. Rush brings the ham a bit more than his first film, which is welcome in a movie like this, but has the problem of turning a frankly despicable character into a loveable comic relief stooge. As for Depp, he still gets some great Jack Sparrow moments (especially his ending bit), but the seriousness of the film kind of restrains him at times. The multiple Sparrow hallucinations are somewhat self-indulgent, but are very funny.

*For those who missed them in the second film, the two idiot soldiers are back.

*The comedy in this film is very low-key and there are times when the film seems to be working too hard to do comedy (my audience rarely laughed). That's okay for a film of this nature, though (actually, all the great one-liners are in the trailer).

*The set-up for the next movie is done well. I'm hoping it involves Danny Trejo as Ponce de Leon with Cheech Marin as his sidekick.

Wow... that was... terrible.

I mean, I thought the first one was great and the second nigh-well a masterpiece, with one of the best suprise endings I'd ever seen, but this one...

It was terrible.

The body count and violence, already a bit overintense for the 'fun' kind of movie the first one was, was multiplied tenfold, while the humor, adventure, wit, and clever writing that made the first two great was downplayed to almost nothing! Sure, there were a few good gags...

*MAJOR SPOILERS*





...such as the true nature of the pieces of eight, and some nice ride-references, but gads- it was dark, dismal, depressing, bloodthirsty even though it had minimal blood, and generally unsatisfying in the highest. It was worst at the beginning- it seemed like once the ship turned upsidedown, the movie was turning around, though still not as good as the other two- but then the bizarre nearly-naked giantess sequence brought it crashing back down again; the movie was bizarre and seemed even pointless at times- nobody got a grand entrance, very few got a great comedy bit (in fact, various moments at the brethren gathering are the only good humor that I can think of at the moment aside from a few scattered one-liners), and really by the end, there was no one that could win satisfyingly. Everyone was pretty despicable by the end. At least a few options I would have considered less unsavory:
-Bootstrap stabs the heart, becomes new Flying Dutchman captain. Will and Elizabeth live happily ever after together. (I suppose a happy ending for Davy and Calypso was never an option, but at least leave one couple together...) Jack gets the Pearl, Barbosa... does something. Kind of a loose end. Which leads to option 2...
-Barbossa stabs the heart. Becomes Dutchman captain. Frees Bootstrap (having Will save him and Barbossa owe him a debt wouldn't have been hard at all). Will and Elizabeth live happily ever after, together. Jack sails off with the Pearl.

Either one would have been infinetly more satisfying- especially the second, and it seems poetic that a dead man returned from the dead captain the Dutchman. I can see the irony in having Jack leave exactly as he arrived at first- but really, the ending seems designed solely to open the way for another sequel, which is really pushing it in one of these tied-up-storyline-style trilogies.

There are a lot of unexplained things, or poorly explained- whence are the dead going, exactly? Because it looks like they're headed for the Locker. Which seems rather unfair... die at sea, be condemned to a living nightmare forever. Tough luck. Why are some floating dead, others in boats? (while we're on the subject, why did Governor Swan have to die? It's not like the info he gave was critical to the plot- they learn it later from bootstrap. It's not like his death served much of a story necessity. It seems like it's sole purpose was to make Beckett seem like a Really Bad Guy. What, the opening wasn't enough for that? Speaking of which... any movie that starts with public executions over the role call of destroyed civil liberties and climaxes in the hanging of a little boy? Already under a bad omen.)

Also, what the heck was up with the whole Calypso plot? I mean, it was really bizarre, really, really... especially the whole turn-into-a-naked-giant-then-crumble-into-a-bunch-of-crabs thing... and in the end, she served NO purpose except to create the Malestrom for them to fight in! She promised the last things the pirates would know was her cruelty- but she never DID anything to them! In fact, the only two ships she might have spared, The Pearl, because Barbossa freed her, and the Dutchman, because she still (I think...) loved Jones, were in the Malestrom- seems the perfect time to rise up and annihilate every other massed ship at once, which you'd think as the 'sea godess' she could easily do! But she didn't- unless it was supposed to be the shock of Davy dying stopped her plans... but all of the sudden, the weather calms and we're left thinking "so what was the point of all that???"

Davy Jones, while looking better than ever, was really far less intimidating being turned into a pathetic captive stooge- he lost his power and presitge. And while the whole "ordered you to kill your pet" thing didn't make sense at first, and upon seeing the beached Kraken gave a powerful sense of how in-control Beckett was, it also seemed to smack of "Well, we can't figure out how to resolve that plot element, too... so how can we write it out at the start of the movie?"

As for Beckett, he really just doesn't seem to work as a villain. Despite perpetrating some of the most heinous acts, he just doesn't seem BAD enough in this film that his defeat is really satisfying. Perhpas because by the end of this movie, EVERYONE has indulged in such shady actions that he just seems another, somewhat darker shade of grey- and considering that the film opens with the mass execution of innocent citizens, that's saying something about how far the others sink!

Barbossa doesn't seem as funny, clever, or witty this time around- it's like being killed knocked him slightly off his nut. He's a far duller character this time around. So are most of the returning regulars, including our duo... Risotto and Piccaso, for lack of remembering their actual names. :-) Although admitedly, the gag about Barbosa's Piece of Eight was utterly brilliant. (Speaking of which, I mentioned the writing quality seeming to be lower in this film- does anyone else feel that if that scene had happened in either of the other two films, the piece would NOT have been what Jack fingered, and that would have turned out to be a red hearing? It seems like the misdirection on this film was of lower quality.)

Speaking of misdirection failing, why the big fuss about trying to make it look like Will's fate and the Dutchman's were anything other that what anyone with half a brain following the plot already knew they had to be? I mean, we KNEW based on their great calling of ferrying lost souls that the Dutchman couldn't be destroyed (why does a ship that ferries lost souls to the afterlife need all those cannons? Or did Jones add those after he became corrupted?) And we KNEW what would happen to whoever stabbed the heart... so why the big misdirection and the big 'suprise reveal' of Will as the captain? The only suprise- a nice touch I hadn't considered- was the fish-crew becoming human again because their purpose was renewed. (I was waiting for the scene where they start to cut out Will's heart and then realize that IT's already been stabbed, too... somehow becoming captain cures you of that? Perhaps that's the one way that the Dutchman could be destroyed- a logic feedback loop! "Turner's stabbed Davy's heart, he's the captain. No, wait, Turner's been stabbed in the heart, that makes whoever stabbed him captain. But that was Davy. But Davy's heart's been stabbed, which makes whoever stabbed him captain... but that's Turner, and his heart's been stabbed... by Dav- *POOF*")

And speaking of Red Herrings- while Tia Dalma being the woman Jones loved was very easy to predict for anyone that noticed the twin lockets, there were a number of other carryovers from the second film that weren't resolved. What WAS Jack's compass pointing to that whole film? What was the point of that supposedly significant ring that Jack palmed in Tia Dalma's shack?

On the subject of Tia Dalma, WHY is it that she could bring back Barbossa but said 'nothing could be done' for Governer Swan? It seems more like she just didn't want to...

What does Calypso being back in control of the seas mean? They kept talking about it, but nothing ever came of it, nor was it explored- nothing seemed to have changed.

Also, was it me, or did the voyage to the locker seem to short and simple, Jack's rescue seem to short and simple, and all of the buildup seem generally unjustified? There was precious little time devoted to being 'At World's End,' really, it seems more like the title should have been Pirates of the Caribbean: Betrayal of... Everyone. Or Pirates of the Caribbean: Appocolypse.

Finally, Jack's hallucination were rather annoying to me- the coppies in the brig also seemed of highly dissapointing quality, special-effects-wise, not even remotely looking like they were anything but bluescreened in, suprising considering the high effects quality throughout- and they seemed rather pointless. Unless showing that Jack was mentally scarred by his experience- but even then, nothing was ever done with it... and Jack's nigthmare didn't even go on for long enough for us to be able to get a good grip on it, so it was hard to even tell that the crabs and the 'escape' weren't a part of it, since the whole thing seemed pretty much like a bizarre hallucination. (And what was the deal with peanuts throughout the film? In another movie, I would've taken those as subtle hints that everything ocurring was a big hallucination and that all were still trapped in the locker...)



*END SPOILERS*



Well, there are more points, a few good, mostly bad, to be touched on for this film. I must say after being such an enormous fan of the first two, I was severely dissapointed in this film- even things that looked awesome in the trailers, like the waterfall, the whirlpool, and Jones vs. Sparrow on the yardarm, seemed small and unimpressive and generally not nearly as good as they could have been... I truly wish it had been a much better end to a great series.

Regarding your two options, Zarm:

1. I'm not sure if that would work--would Bootstrap have the power to do that, being already in Jones' debt himself?

2. This makes a fair deal of sense, but it's almost "too" sensible. I like the kind of bittersweet ending the film presents, even though the plot twists already discussed in the film's ending might indicate a way out.

My interpretation of Davy Jones' Locker is that Jack was in some particularly odd purgatorical form of death that not everyone must experience.

I wholeheartedly agree that Barbossa is somewhat bowderlized in this film. It's like the charming-but-evil guy of the first film is gone and we've just got your Typical Robust Pirate Dude.

*STILL SPOILERISH*

1. Good point, I hadn't considered that...

2. Admittedly, it does seem more like an old sea legend, the way it ends... I don't like it all though- perhaps I'm just too much of a realist and put myself in the position of a newlywed suddenly consigened to see his bride maybe five times in your lifetime...? (And the ending after the credits makes it worse- no, not by having a family, I mean that is wonderful at any time- but now you must choose between getting to know your son for 24 hours or seeing your wife who you won't see for another decade? What a choice! I kept waiting for Elizabeth to sign on with the Dutchman's crew! Wouldn't that work?)


As for the locker, it is stated in the commentary of Dead Man's Chest and the film that Davy Jones' Locker is a place where your worst nightmares come true, I believe- but you're saying you think there are different 'levels' of the locker? I.E. Some are Hell but others are Heaven, type of a thing?

One moment where Barbossa seems like the old Barbossa is during the whole waterfall-sequence and the 'of course we're good and lost!' speech. Other than that...

*END SPOILERS... AND POST*

I haven't seen this yet, but Roger Ebert has posted some ponderings that lend themselves well to a nitpicking site like ours, so here it is. Enjoy.

*STILL SPOILERY*

One other thing ocurred to me- I liked the bit with the key-ring dog.

Also, what's our Pirates ride reference count for this film? I only counted two: Jack's father with the banjo, and the medley of ride sounds just after they go over the falls. Any (as I suspect) that I've missed?

*END SPOILERS, you know the drill...*

Very interesting assesment there Zarm, However good doesnt always win in the end and a live happily ever after fairy tale ending doesnt alawys occur. Sounds like the movie might not be everyone's cup o tea but still sounds like an interesting one.

Hopefully if everythign goes well I'll be going to sea this one tomorrow and will be able to draw some conclusions o me ownnn... Arrr mateys until then.

"*What was with Chow-yun Fat insisting that Elizabeth was Calypso? It comes off as an oddball red herring, but he seems pretty darn sure. "

Didn't Barbosa give a meaningful look towards Elizabeth when he was talking about Calypso. I thought he was trying to make Chow-yun Fath think that she was Calypso.

I quite liked it. I only had one big problem. Davy Jones spent the last two movies running around the world's oceans. Couldn't Will show up every week or two and visit with Elizabeth if they just stayed on a ship? Or couldn't he just visit her if he stood in a bucket like Jones does in this film? I know that he has a job to do in the other world but are you telling me he can't take a day a week or even a month off?

True, Derek, I will admit- I am a Happy Ending junkie- to my mind, life is indeed filled with enough unhappy endings and troubles and evil winning... that my entertainment, which is supposed to be escapism from that real world, doesn't need more of the same! So that is more of a matter of personal preference. (And as I said, the bittwersweetness DOES lend it the flavor of an old sea legend, the ending snippet after the credits especially.) Rest assured, though... that's hardly the only- or even main- reason that I panned the film! :-)


Merat- or, as I've heard a number of people suggest, is there any reason why Elizabeth couldn't join the ship? They had Will as a 'guest' before, after all, so it's not like only crew can be aboard... the separation thing does feel pretty arbitrary!


One other pointed occurred to me today as I was considering the film... is it just me, or story-wise, does Tia Dalma have no point? I mean, everything that she contributes could have come from an alternate source- the exposition could have come from Gibbs, the lore-master, the Jar of dirt could have been an idea of anyone in the crew based on Jones being unable to make landfall, or not even included since it's sole purpose appears to be to keep Jack from realizing the heart was stolen, the Pirate brethren meeting could have occurred without the focus on her, the film could have played the same way without that BIZARRE 'freeing' scene, and the Malestrom could have been a natural phenomenon, a consequence of the doorways between the land of the dead and the living having been opened, or any number of things; indeed, except for the return of Barbossa, which could have VERY easily been explained with the concept that the Aztec Curse and it's stiulation somehow allowed him to find an escape from the land of the dead, and he is the one that is willing to guide them back in through the same route to rescue Jack in excahnge for... whatever he seeks, the Pearl, perhaps- except for the return of Barbossa, Tia Dalma doesn't DO anything that is actually important to the plot or contribute anything that couldn't have been derived from other sources without her character existing. Is there something I'm missing? (Aside from perhaps the whole scene with Jones in the hold- that was an excellent scene, and the pathos and motivations it provided Jones with were a nice contribution to the character, to be sure... but as it LIKEWISE had essentially no impact on the plot...) did Tia Dalma serve any VALID function?

I thought it was suggested that because of Jones running around acting like a pirate salt, that was one of the reasons he had become a monster over the years (figuratively and literally). I think Will pretty much has to do his job to avoid this happening to him.

Good point on the Barbossa glance--I didn't make that connection (I just thought it was obvious who Calypso was, but I forgot that Chow wasn't around Tia Dalma at all).

Yeah, but that was because Jones spent all his time running around the sea. Would Will and his men really become monsters if they just visited the land of the living once a month or so?

A slight change from my opinion on SpiderMan3, it was better than the second, but the first is still the best, IMO.

"Davy Jones, while looking better than ever, was really far less intimidating being turned into a pathetic captive stooge- he lost his power and prestige." Zarm

That was the point wasn't it? He was a pawn of Beckett's for most of the movie and pawn's aren't intimidating. That was however, one thing I don't understand. Why is Jones so afraid of his heart being destroyed? He's had to kill his pet and hasn't been doing his job, which is why he looks like he does. So let somebody else do it and rid yourself of the burden.

"What WAS Jack's compass pointing to that whole [second] film?" Zarm

Whatever Jack wanted it to, which in the second film is Jones' heart. If I'm understanding how that compass works, it points to where its user desires most to go/obtain. For example, at the end when Jack wanted to know the way to the fountain of youth, but the compass knew he wanted some rum first.

I really liked Barbossa (Hector was it?) in this film. He was a bit out of his element from the first one, plus he died, so I see no problem with how he was portrayed here. Aside from maybe that guy in red during the counsel who brought out the codex, who was that anyway, Barbossa is the closest to a stereo-typical pirate IMO.

Some small nits: How were the cannons on the Pearl reloaded so quickly? Watching the muzzle flashes some were re-fired seconds apart. Can the crew of the Dutchman die in a swordfight? The final battle was certainly suspenseful but we see several of them being injured and dismembered. What's the point of being dead if you can still feel pain? How could the Dutchman use its cannons if it can go underwater? Should this movie still be titled Pirates of the Caribbean when there were pirates from around the world and it didn't take place in the Caribbean?

Well, I... uhhhh.... hmmmm... come to think of it, inblackestnight... yes, I suppose that WAS the point! :-) I guess it bothered me largely because they really set Jones up as the main villain, but one with no punch- as many heinous acts as Becket comits, he still doesn't feel like the main villain or the greatest threat; meanwhile, Jones does, but he is also severely overpowered. If his diminishment in power, which admittedly was appropriate, had been balanced by a proportional INCREASE in Becket's power or percieved villainy, it might have worked... but for some reason, evil as we've seen him, much power as he commands, Beckett never feels as powerful as a villain as Jones does; he just nearly drags Jones DOWN to his level. (Perhaps part of it is how much autonomy Jones seems to have and how much of a loose cannon he is referred to as being... he doesn't seem COMPLETELY under Beckett's control, thus Beckett doesn't seem to have the power... but Jones is still under his death threat in the end, so Jones doesn't seem to have the power either.)


"Why is Jones so afraid of his heart being destroyed? He's had to kill his pet and hasn't been doing his job, which is why he looks like he does. So let somebody else do it and rid yourself of the burden."-inblackestnight

I think the reason is simple... despite his catchphrase question and all the power he commands... Davy Jones fears death. (Besides... just because he strayed from his assigned purpose and lost his pet doesn't mean he's lost the will to live; he seems to retain that quite strongly!)


""What WAS Jack's compass pointing to that whole [second] film?" Zarm

Whatever Jack wanted it to, which in the second film is Jones' heart. If I'm understanding how that compass works, it points to where its user desires most to go/obtain. For example, at the end when Jack wanted to know the way to the fountain of youth, but the compass knew he wanted some rum first. "

Well, yes, I understand how the compass works; perhaps I should rephrase... Jack's compass was spinning eratically back and forth, and even Tia Dalma said it "Ahhh... Jack Sparrow does not know what he wants!" which is why he had to give it to Elizabeth to find the heart. So what was it spinning in conflict between? The heart was presumeably one thing... and it would seem implied, at this point, that perhaps Elizabeth was the other? But it seemed very much like a plot point being set up for an explanation in III... instead, it's never explained what it was that was dividing his desire.

I agree with the Jones/Beckett observation. Beckett spends the entire series with a sinister smirk, big talk, and almost nothing to really deserve being the Big Bad Villain. Jones, on the other hand, gets plenty of Big Bad Villain Moments (such as killing Beckett's assistant), but is never made out to be the Big Bad Villain. It thus comes off as there is no main villain.

Exactly.

Also, another thing I meant to mention in the last post, yet ANOTHER of those 'set up but never resolved' things, from Dead Man's Chest- "I have had dealings with Sparrow in the past... we've both left our mark on each other." Cue Pirate brand. Audience 'oooooh's in recognition. "What mark did Jack leave on you?" Never dealt with. Assumption: Answer is forthcoming during confrontation between Sparrow and Beckett. Results: Nothing.

The list of "Was this in a deleted scene or was it just never resolved due to sloppy writing or being some bizarre intentional red herring?" continues to grow...

Ok, that clears things up nicely, refering to Jones and the compass, thanks Zarm. Beckett was a coward who happened across something that gave him an edge, but when things didn't work out he couldn't even command his own ship, which outgunned both the Dutchman and the Pearl.

How much time passes from the first to the third movie? I ask because in the first Will couldn't command a dingy and now he's the captain of the Dutchman, which doesn't need a captain incredibly knowledgable but it couldn't hurt. Seamanship is not an easy thing to learn, trust me I teach it, so unless Barbossa put him to work on their way to Singapore, which should take at least a couple months, I doubt he would make a good commander.

I think that Dead Man's Chest references at least a specific time in reference to when the 'hurricane' incident occurred- but I got the impression that a number of months, perhaps even a year or so, passed from COTBP to DMC, and a matter of days or weeks at most passed (perhaps months, as you pointed out, but travel times in the pirates films haven't always been superbly accurate) between DMC and AWE. (AWE... that sems a rather apropriate acronym for a film so focussed on visual spectacle, don't you think?)

And will became a competent commander for the best reason anyone in a movie ever can; he was taught by the venerable Master Itsinthescript. ;-)

Is it just me, or when Elizabeth and the Singapore crew escape the Dutchman, Norrington decides to shoot the ropes so that Elizabeth can't come back for him...but there were three ropes. He broke all three with one shot.

Wikipedia suggests that some of the more "past-oriented" loose ends can be addressed in the Pirates novels (certainly there is precedent for this--see Wars, Star).

Now THAT's interesting... looking at Wikipedia,

*SPOILERS*

"One scene cut explained that if Calypso had greeted Davy Jones after his ten years of ferrying dead souls, then he would have been freed of his duty: in turn, Will is freed of his captaincy as Elizabeth remains faithful to him ten years later."

*END SPOILERS*

Man, that Calypso just keeps getting more and more likeable, doesn't she?

Possible Nits:

Did Will Turner stab Jones' heart with that knife he made the promise with?

Nits

The ending battle between Beckett's ship and the Dutchman and the Pearl doesn't seem tactically-wise. I'd think that half the cannonballs would blow right through the Endevour (sp?) and hit either the Pearl or the Dutchman. Now the Dutchman being damaged doesn't seem like a real problem, but the Pearl could have easily been.

In the Malstrom, the Dutchman and the Pearl are firing at each other yet, the angle of the ships wouldn't allow them to hit each other. They are too off axis to hit anything but water.

Additionally, I'd think that walking around on the ships would be difficult with the deck being slanted. Of course, we know it wasn't in every close up shot. It's possible that if the whirlpool was spinning fast enough and the ships in the whirlpool were too, then the centripetal force might allow them to stand upright. However, the wide shots have the ships moving too slow. Of course, if the ships weren't moving fast enough, then the whirlpool itself must not be either. But it has to be given the angle of the water between the highest and lowest point. Thus, the nit is likely that ships weren't shown moving fast enough.

Criticism of Misc Things

Oh, and I found Rambo Beckett walking around unhurt in the final battle to be kind of cheesy. Granted, its a fantasy film with monsters and other things, but some shrapnel should have hit him when his ship is being blown up around him.

Also, I'm not a military person, but I think that the Lt. who kept asking for orders should have recognized that Beckett wasn't fit to command and started shouting orders much sooner than he did. It's one thing if Beckett had ordered something, but his silence should have been a clue that he was no longer competant to command.

Is Lizzy alone on some island? I was expecting that when Gibbs said her chariot awaits, that she was going to the Dutchman to be with her husband, but that didn't seem like the case.

I'm confused as to why Will's heart had to be cut out and locked in a chest. Davy's was because he couldn't stand the pain of love, so he carved it out. Will didn't need to cut have his heart removed.

If Tia Dalma is Calypso, and really is a goddess, who and what are her people that lived in the swamp with her in DMC?

"If Tia Dalma is Calypso, and really is a goddess, who and what are her people that lived in the swamp with her in DMC?"

Groupies. :-)

"*For those who missed them in the second film, the two idiot soldiers are back.*"

Their names are Murtogg and Mullroy.

The funny thing is, for as many people as mentioned them... I never missed them in Dead Man's Chest. I almost forgot about their existance. But they do get a great payoff at the end of this one.

Was it ever explained how the Black Pearl went from massively trashed at the end of "Dead Man's Chest" to pristine condition at the beginning of this movie? (If it has already been discussed here, I apologize, as I haven't read this board).

nope... no mention of it to my knowledge.

I am guessing... and this is a bit of a stretch, I admit- that it, to, was dragged down to the locker, since it was apparently miraculously raised before... and since it was not 'naturally' sunk or raised, it... ummmmm... actually, I can't even figure out where I was going with that. :-) The other option, I suppose, is that the Pearl we see is part of Jack's imagination/personall hell in the locker, and it is the equivalent of an object from Star Trek leaving the Holodeck- they were all wraiths, unreal, undeed, however you prefer, in the 'locker world,' but whatever was pulled back with them, even if it was originally unreal, became real when it arrived in the real world.

Or something.

I dunno. :-)

That's possible. The only other thing I could think of was that Jack repaired the ship to pass the time while he was trapped in the locker. Of course, he had no materials, tools, etc. that we know of.

Maybe he repaired it with the remains of all the Jack's that he killed for insubordination.

And here I thought things couldn't get much grislier than Canibal Island...! :-O

"Is it just me, or when Elizabeth and the Singapore crew escape the Dutchman, Norrington decides to shoot the ropes so that Elizabeth can't come back for him...but there were three ropes. He broke all three with one shot."

Well, he's a good shot!

"Also, I'm not a military person, but I think that the Lt. who kept asking for orders should have recognized that Beckett wasn't fit to command and started shouting orders much sooner than he did. It's one thing if Beckett had ordered something, but his silence should have been a clue that he was no longer competant to command."

I'm a military person, and yes, you're probably right. BTW, the lieutenant's name is Groves.

Regarding shooting the ropes, it's possible that it was just one rope arranged in a pulley system.

After watching it again now that it's on DVD, I found that the story line does make a little more sense; the parts dealing with revenge and betrayel of Jones and Caly.

Well, up until the end dealing with 60 foot woman and the whole need to cut out the heart on Turner.

Also, I think that once Will is in commmand of the Dutchman, the sails look more white/clear as opposed to the seaweed green when Jones was commanding.

Oh, and I wonder if Will will learn to play the Organ that Jones had in his cabin.

Ummm, everyone did watch all the way through the end credits, didn't they? There's a rather nice epilogue "stinger".

I was terrifically bored by Pirates I -- it took me all of 3 or 4 nights to watch the whole thing. Pirates II I recall being rather enjoyable, if a bit preposterous.

III (this one) I intentionally broke up over two nights due to its length. Hated the beginning. Hated it, with all the hangings and such. Wondering what I was getting myself into.

Watched the final 90 minutes or so the next night and found it totally engaging. Even though I couldn't follow half the plot, or recall the carryover from the previous movies, the set pieces were so enthralling I didn't care. And when Keira Knightley, Orlando Bloom, Bill Nighy, or of course Johnny Depp were on screen, I just couldn't take my eyes off them.

I don't care for the fact that they feel they had to set it up for a sequel with Captain Jack and the Fountain of Youth. The next movie should just take care of itself. But the stinger after the credits was a wonderful touch. One quibble -- I think it was intentional that the gender of the child was ambiguous. Geez, if you can set up the actual movie for a sequel, at least tell us if their kid is a boy or a girl -- especially if s/he is shown on screen!!

Also, what's our Pirates ride reference count for this film? I only counted two: Jack's father with the banjo, and the medley of ride sounds just after they go over the falls. Any (as I suspect) that I've missed?
As Captain Jack floats away at the end, he sings a little ditty to himself. I believe this is is the same one that was added with his animatronic figure that is now at the very end of the ride. (The ride got stuck there, so I "got" to listen to it for about 15 minutes.)

Zarm: What WAS Jack's compass pointing to that whole film?
Finally saw most of this movie again and in the second movie I believe Jack's compass was spinning because he couldn't decide between Jones' heart and Elizabeth, which of course Tia caught on to.

Guardian: Was it ever explained how the Black Pearl went from massively trashed at the end of "Dead Man's Chest" to pristine condition at the beginning of this movie?
There was definate visable damage on the Pearl even after returning from the locker; pieces of railing missing for example.

Whomever said it, I agree that the second and third could've been combined into one, possibly making the fountain of youth expedition the third.

Nits;

The East India company was a private business, and while rich and powerful it's personel had no authority over the Royal Navy and could not have 'rented' ships from them for any reason.

Members of the East India company could not give orders to officers in the Royal Navy or command one of the Kings ships. Had they tried they would have thrown off the ship.

Corrignton returns with the rank of Admiral, with the implication that it was Beckett who arranged this. The Royal Navy of the time didn't work that way. Promotion from Post-Captain to Admiral was done purely through senority - that is how long that person had served in the navy. Even the King himself could not and would not change this. There were a limited number of Admirals in service, and promotion to that rank could only occur if one of them died. As a result the average age of a British Admiral of the time was around 60.

The British warships make an impressive sight as they fill the horizon...more impressive would have been seeing them all shot for disobaying the standing orders of the day. The Royal Navy had standing orders that all ships should fight in the line of battle - that is in line astern formation. Captains or Admirals who ignored this were court martialed and at best dismissed from the service.

You could not roll a ship like the Pearl by having the crew run from side to side. And if you got it rolling even a fraction of what you'd need the upper masts would fall off the ship.

The masts were securely fastened to the ship by Bonnie and Clyde who attached themselves upside.

(sorry, can't remember their names)

By Polls Voice (Polls_voice) on Wednesday, July 23, 2008 - 8:47 pm:

The masts were securely fastened to the ship by Bonnie and Clyde who attached themselves upside.

Nope. The masts were not one single length of wood, but at least three sections of mast; Lower, upper and top masts. The lower mast rested in the keel, the upper mast rested in a bracket rather like a bayonet socket on a musket on the lower mast, and the top masts likewise rested on the upper masts in the same way.

All the masts had to be secured by thick ropes fore and aft (Front and back) called Stays and Braces (The main-brace was a very thick rope that supported the main-mast), to the sides the masts were secured by the shrouds. These ropes were needed to prevent the upper and top masts from coming out of their sockets and falling off the ship - without them the masts would 'roll out' or 'go by the board' (Fall off the ship or onto the deck) even in the calmest seas.

Even in ships where the ropes were intact and in good order the masts could 'go by the board' if the ship was rolled or pitched to much - Normally this happened in heavy weather.

Simply put the Pearl would have lost her top and upper masts long before she rolled over. (And before then the cannons that had been cut loose would slide across the deck and smash through the hull).

I was joking.

I thought that was understood by the obvious fact that two people can't be structural supports. Sorry, I forgot the smiley.

Influx: Ummm, everyone did watch all the way through the end credits, didn't they? There's a rather nice epilogue "stinger".
I finally remembered to wait until after the credits and saw the "stinger", but it still wasn't a great ending, for Will and Elizabeth anyway. Granted, they weren't in the 'lead roles' but the least that could've happened was to have Bootstrap stab the heart before Davy impaled Will with the sword he made.

PV: In the Malstrom, the Dutchman and the Pearl are firing at each other yet, the angle of the ships wouldn't allow them to hit each other. They are too off axis to hit anything but water.
When they first start shooting the Pearl would hit Dutchman but not visa versa. Throughout most of the battle however, they should not be able to hit each other.

One thing I love about this movie, all three really, is the music; fantastic! I haven't bought music from a movie in a while but I may for these.

Not only is Jack an incredible shot, in this and the previous movie, but his balance is also uncanny, when sword fighting on the cross beam with Jones!

"Not only is Jack an incredible shot, in this and the previous movie, but his balance is also uncanny, when sword fighting on the cross beam with Jones!" - inbluestday

It's even more amazing considering the ship is slimey and it's raining.

Influx: Geez, if you can set up the actual movie for a sequel, at least tell us if their kid is a boy or a girl -- especially if s/he is shown on screen!!
I thought it was pretty obvious that was a boy. Something I don't think was brought up yet was how does somebody who is dead conceive a child? Sure Elizabeth could've been pregnant before this movie but all the traveling they do should've taken months so she would've shown by now. Something that was mentioned, Will can't go on land but once every ten years, so why can't Liz go on the Dutchman for a bit? Obviously she can't help guide those lost at sea to the afterlife but a visit here and there surely wouldn't interfere much.

Why can't she go to the other side? She did before.

I meant for long periods of time, because she'd probably go a little crazy watching dead people all the time, but you're right Polls .

Zarm: On the subject of Tia Dalma, WHY is it that she could bring back Barbossa but said 'nothing could be done' for Governer Swan? It seems more like she just didn't want to...
My guess is that she actually obtained Hector's body, while she only saw the governor's soul in the locker.

Andrew: Is it just me, or when Elizabeth and the Singapore crew escape the Dutchman, Norrington decides to shoot the ropes so that Elizabeth can't come back for him...but there were three ropes. He broke all three with one shot.
There were actually more like six ropes, and no pulley system that I could see. Perhaps there was enough tension that if one were severed the rest would snap; there really was no good reason for the rest to brake after only shooting one.

I thought it was a nice touch when Barbossa cut Jack's piece of eight off his head there was a slash in his bandana that was also present in the duplicates of Jack in the Dutchman's brig.

During this movie and the first Hector seemed like somebody who was pretty knowledgable in pirate-lore, and the sea in general, but he was so sure that freeing Calypso would be their salvation, why is that? Pehraps she made a deal with him for bringing him back to life to free her but are there any other possibilities? Also, many here didn't seem to like Barbossa in this movie as much as the first but I thought he did a great job, especially after at the bretheren court and after taking the helm going into battle.

I can see why everybody wants the Black Pearl so badly, other than it can outrun the Flying Dutchman. It can take one hell of pounding and stay afloat with little visable damage, and is always fully stocked somehow.

Andrew: Is it just me, or when Elizabeth and the Singapore crew escape the Dutchman, Norrington decides to shoot the ropes so that Elizabeth can't come back for him...but there were three ropes. He broke all three with one shot.
There were actually more like six ropes, and no pulley system that I could see. Perhaps there was enough tension that if one were severed the rest would snap; there really was no good reason for the rest to brake after only shooting one.

He was using "bird shot" when he fired on the ropes.

During this movie and the first Hector seemed like somebody who was pretty knowledgable in pirate-lore, and the sea in general, but he was so sure that freeing Calypso would be their salvation, why is that? Pehraps she made a deal with him for bringing him back to life to free her but are there any other possibilities?

Yes, Hector was obligated to release her as part of her bringing him back to life. That's why he says they agreed on the ends only...

Cyber: The East India company was a private business, and while rich and powerful it's personel had no authority over the Royal Navy and could not have 'rented' ships from them for any reason.
I didn't think much of what you said here, becuase you're right, but I just caught a clip in Dead Man's Chest where Beckett persuaded, blackmailed rather, Governor Swan into his employ which included his loyalty, authority, and ties to England. This may have been what gave Beckett control over the local navy, and the good Governor wan likely not the only one he did this to. Not the most legitimate means but when trying to oversee property great distances away in those days it probably isn't too far off from how things were done, aside from the whole Admiral Norrington bit that is.

When the chubbier one between Murtogg and Mullroy, the two idiot sailors(not soliders), was trying to get back the chest he still had that small cannon with him, and the other told him to 'leave it', but how did he expect to fire it carrying it with both hands? Granted he's not too bright, hence idiot, but that thing must be quite heavy, and they are in pursuit... Also, why did they stay on the Black Pearl after it left Tourtuga a the end? Keeping up the charade until the ship gets to port makes sense but there's no doubt they'd stick out trying to become pirates.

I just caught a clip in Dead Man's Chest where Beckett persuaded, blackmailed rather, Governor Swan into his employ which included his loyalty, authority, and ties to England. This may have been what gave Beckett control over the local navy

The local navy in the Caribbean never, at any point, consisted of 12 ships of the line. (There was quite simply not enough supplies or men to support a fleet of that size). Even the North American squadron based in New York never had that many ships.
The only place Becket could have got so many ships would have been from England. However, in a time of peace with the European powers the Royal Navy couldn't afford to fit out a squadron of 12 ships of the line to waltz around the Caribbean (They would have sent Frigates, which would be better suited for the waters and cheaper). In a time of war all the Ships of the Line would have been tied up elsewhere, mainly in the homefleet to protect against invasion. While the British did send sometimes send large forces into the Caribbean these were always military missions to capture French, Spanish or Danish islands or to counteract large fleets sent by one of the powers above.

Swan's authority over the Navy would be limited. While he could, in effect, act as the King and tell the Navy what he wanted them to do and even tell them to work with civilians. He could not tell the Navy to take orders from Beckett, best he could do would be to tell them to work with him. Even so on a Royal Navy ship ultimate authority rested on the Captain or Admiral. A civilian who tried to give orders to the crew of a ship would at best be politely ignored, and if they kept trying taken below decks out of the way.

The same holds for postings in the Navy. The local Governor had no authority over promotions or demotions in the navy - this rested with the Admiralty in London. It was the Admiralty in London who assigned Admirals to stations or removed them. Technically they were also the ones who promoted officers up to post rank (The rank of Post-Captain, modern rank is just Captain), although admirals overseas stations did have some latitude to promote officers into vacant positions this still had to be confirmed by the Admiralty. The chain of command in a squadron would have been well known, and it would have been quite clear who would be talking over if the Admiral of a fleet was killed or ill.

In short Becket, with or without Swan's powers, could not order the Navy around, could not promote Corrington to the rank of Admiral or any other rank and would not have been able to get 12 ships of the line from the Navy for any purpose.

Nit; If Corrington had been dismissed from the service he should have been recalled back to England first. Even if he had been dismissed from the station the Navy would have allowed him free passage back to England on one of their ships. A full dismissal from the service would require a court martial, and if his 'crime' was simply an inability to deal with the pirates this would not be enough to dismiss him from the service. The worst that would have happened to him would have been a recall back to England and never being given command of a ship again.

Thank for all that Cyber but I was just trying to make sense out of what the writers may have been trying to protray. I know that there probably wasn't much of a display of British force far from England, or any conflict they were in, so perhaps Beckett had a pseudo-royal fleet; meaning they weren't acutally Navy. Again, I'm just speculating here, I don't know how they are trying to justify that, but it is entertaining fiction so I'm willing to overlook some things

Thank for all that Cyber

Your welcome.

I was just trying to make sense out of what the writers may have been trying to protray.

The Stereotypical American image of the British in the 1700's, plus a good helping of ignorance and a pinch of apathy.

I know that there probably wasn't much of a display of British force far from England, or any conflict they were in,

Depends on the exact date - which we are not given. If this is meant to be towards the end of the golden age of pirates then the date would be between 1700 and 1720, after which an increasing number of warships (frigates, brigs and sloops at any rate) started to be stationed in the Caribbean and North America to protect shipping. Britain was at war with the French at varying periods between 1650 and 1730, and technically at war with Spain in those waters throughout as the Spanish claimed those waters as their own and treated any ship there that wasn't Spanish as being hostile. Even if Spain was not at war with that nation in Europe.

Many of the wars with France or Spain right up until the end of the 1700's tended to show the same general British responses. First the home fleet would be brought up to strength, then a squadron of ships and troops would be sent off to the Caribbean to try and capture French or Spanish islands - and if it was war with the Spanish try to capture the Spanish ships moving silver to Spain.

The first time this was done was in the 1650's when Cromwell sent a large fleet to capture some of the main Spanish islands. The results (which were repeated right up until the very start of the 1800's) involved most of the troops and sailors dying from tropical diseases and failing to do much else (apart from capturing Jamaica the first time around).

None of these fleets stayed long in the waters, mainly because a single ship of the line (battleship in today's terms) would have a crew of around 600. 12 ships of the line would, therefore, be carrying over 7200 sailors alone - which doesn't include the men on troopships and smaller supporting frigates (Troops alone would add at least 2000 to 10,000 to that figure). No military power at that time could support that many ships and men so far from their home bases - the British reckoned that a ship in the Caribbean wore out five times faster than in home waters - and none of the islands could provide enough men to replace those who died from illness on the ships. Even a couple of small frigates with crews of around 200 could, and were, crippled due to an inability to replace sailors who died on the station.

Ironically this lead to the pirate age. As a large squadron of ships simply couldn't be supported locally the Jamaica governors had to reply on local privateers for defence against the (much) larger Spanish and French islands. The French followed quickly enough (In fact Torteaga was a French colony where many pirates were based in real life). Since any ships travelling from Europe to North America had to pass through the Caribbean due to the prevailing winds it wasn't long before the Privateers became less discriminating about the nationality of their targets and became pirates.

perhaps Beckett had a pseudo-royal fleet; meaning they weren't acutally Navy.

The ships were large two decked ships of the line - their sail plan is clearly that of a man of war, and they are carrying pendants, which were only used on warships. Had the East India company flown pendants on its ships they would have been in REAL trouble with everyone from the King down to the average man in the street. The East India company had been given a Royal Charter to work in India in the Kings name - but not in the Caribbean it had to be said - and aggravating the King by assuming to much authority would have lead to the charter being revoked.

The officers are clearly wearing uniforms of the Royal Navy (which they wouldn't get for a decade or more anyway...still). While it was far from unusual for officers in the Royal Navy to serve on East India ships if they couldn't get a ship from the Admiralty, it would not have been permitted for them to have worn Navy uniforms while doing so.

Ships of the line were expensive, very expensive. very roughly they would, in today's money, cost almost as much as a Nimitz class aircraft carrier. There were no private groups who could have afforded to build two or three decked ships of the line, none who could have managed to crew them and none who would have been allowed to have done so. Protection against the main fleets of other powers (ie, other ships of the line) rested with the Navy.

This may be already mentioned but in Singapore at SaoFang's(?) bath-house, or whatever you want to call it, he has a red rag that seems to jump positions, especially when he's reaching for the charts that Will was trying to steal. Also, in the beginning, with the hangings, there were plenty of people to overtake the gaurds. Sure they were in chains, and some would not make it, but muskets are just one shot and the chains could be used to their advantage if they follow the lyrics to the song with "all together."

Me: I believe Jack's compass was spinning because he couldn't decide between Jones' heart and Elizabeth...
Having just rewatched DMC, I can say that we are not told what Jack was trying to decide between. I no longer think one was Elizabeth, but the other is certainly the heart.

Zarm: is it just me, or story-wise, does Tia Dalma have no point?
It's not just you. I wondered that even upon my first viewing. You make excellent points Zarm. As the years have passed since this movie was released, your points stand out more-and-more.