# PotC: Dead Man's Chest spoiler thread



## Firebeetle (Jul 6, 2006)

Just saw this one late last night. 

It's all there baby, in spades it's there. The movie makers were very aware of everything that made the first movie fun and cool and used that same attitude in the second one. 

It has:
1.) Plenty of scary and/or gross moments between big sea monsters, monstrous pirates, highly piereced cannibals, and a still beating heart.
2.) EVERYBODY is back, including characters (plural) you wrote off a long time ago. Even the monkey is back. I do mean everyone folks.
3.) EVERYBODY has an agenda, which leads to some interesting fights. Not even Will and Elizabeth are on the same page about things. 
4.) Lots of interesting action scenes with rolling, spherical bone cages, swordfights on rolling mill wheels (lots of rolling), taking on a giant sea beast _without_ stabbing it in it's eye/mouth/nostril/ear canal and lots more. Fun, fun, fun.
5.) Davy Jones, his crew and ship are worth price of admission alone. It's terrific to watch.
6.) Gaming moment: Liar's Dice plays a key role in the story.
7.) Two words: Love triangle

My big complaints would be:
1.) Like Jones' tentacles, the plot is all over the place, wiggling and grasping often pointlessly. This first movie was much, much tighter in this regard.
2.) There is not full closure at the end, too many plot threads left dangling. It does NOT negate the first movie, as a second installment often does (a la Matrix). However, this movie lays lots of groundwork for the third movie which is annoying. Luckily, there is no 10 minute preview like at the end of Back to the Future 2.

I would recommend going. It's too much fun to miss.

Now, once again, it is time for the ritual "I don't have a life other than kvetching about movies" negative posts. Commence, people, commence.


----------



## frankthedm (Jul 6, 2006)

Not much spoiler-age in that post really.

Movie sounds good. And here i was worried I'd need to be half drunk to enjoy the flick.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jul 6, 2006)

The lack of closure doesn't bother me.  I don't mind the setup for the third movie 

The plot being all over the place was an issue, but I didn't find it too vexing.

My only real complaint was that there were several places where fights seen in the background were being phoned in.  The Sparrow/Will/Norrington fight on the beach, or Sparrow swinging an oar at a fish-pirate by the longboat, turned very 'rehearsal-mode' when they weren't in foreground.

But on the whole, I laughed, I clapped, and I had a great time.  I'll be going back to see it again 

(The boots in the back room of Tia Dalma's hut bothered me through the rest of the film - who's back there, who's back there?  The reveal was worth it  )

One of my favourite moments?  "Look!" KABLAM! "An undead monkey!"

Another - Jack's pole vault / canyon sequence.  Beautiful 

And I _loved_ the wheel fight.

-Hyp.


----------



## RangerWickett (Jul 7, 2006)

Amazing. This is the first movie in years I've wanted to see in theaters multiple times.

I wish there'd be some more resolution. If I compare it to The Empire Strikes Back, at least Empire had a big reveal, and the bad guys won (which is a resolution, albeit a tragic one). In Pirates 2, . . .

I'm a writer, I'll see if I can think of a better way to end the flick, then send it back in time to Jerry Bruckheimer.


----------



## DonTadow (Jul 7, 2006)

Loved it too. The plot was complex, which was a relief from other movies. I loved the multiple threads. This was an obvious second of a triloigory movie much in the same league with Empire Strikes Back. There are suppose to be dangling plot points to lead and be wrapped up in the first. I'd say the return of two villians from the previous movie, the revelation that sparrow was suppose to be dead, that wills father is surviving on davey jones locker and that the tea company has a kraken were pretty big plot movements for me. Not quite "i'm your father seperately" but alone they made it enough. 



The plot felt real, not like a string. Felt like a good role playing game as opposed to one where the DM strings you from encounter to encounter. I especially liked how Sparrow changes his objective at the pirates island after encountering Elizabeth . He went from collecting the 100 to realizing he might have a legit shot at finding the treasure chest and having a "better" bargaining chip. 

I thought the movie did a good job with the multiple fight scenes. Again, just felt like a lot was going on and it was fun to watch. Once again it reminded me of my favorite d and d movmeents when the party splits but there's action on two fronts. 

My biggest critique is Sparrow accepting the old guy on his ship after he tried to kill him. Outside of being looney Sparrow has no real reason to allow someone whom does not like him on his ship.  It's like allowing the annoying guy into your game. The rest of the movie allowed me to suspend my belief enough for that part to ride it through. After the disappointing xmen, superman, mii3 i believe the summer finally has its first real big hit.

Believe it or not, I ran a similiar encounter with a Kraken and mermen pirates in december of this year with no knowledge of the movie's plot. As I watched the movie, one of my players noted how similiar the encounter was right from the tentacles attacking turns 1 through 4 before the Kraken fully appears and takes the boat by turn 6. then the mermen come and scoop up the survivors.


----------



## Wereserpent (Jul 7, 2006)

I thought it was awesome!!!


----------



## frankthedm (Jul 7, 2006)

Davey Jones had a _SoulBlade/Caliber _ Cevantes De Leone vibe going for him, if slightly less evil. 

So is it me or is Tia Dalma the real _heart _of the problem? Those trinket's jack palms in her place look a bit like some stuff 



Spoiler



Davey


 had IIRC. Also 



Spoiler



Davey


 seemed unamused when he was likened to 



Spoiler



the devil by a crewmember.


To me that hints of 



Spoiler



Davey


 recognizing a greater evil than himself.



			
				Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> And I _loved_ the wheel fight.-Hyp.



Someone should take clips from that and the rolling cage scene and make a Hamsterdance video.

The bit with the catholic pirate, rosary in hand, was very good. Daring for disney really.

Anyone else forsee Jack heading for bad times when he was acting a bit more evil in this movie than in the first?

On that subject, any one else suspecting a 



Spoiler



Jonah


 senario? After all he was deep in the 



Spoiler



mouth


 and he is nuts enough to leap _past_ the 



Spoiler



teeth


 hoping the thing 



Spoiler



digests slowly


 enough to escape later. Captain Jack is a cool character, but he deserves 



Spoiler



an ordeal


 more than a 



Spoiler



Resurrection


.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jul 7, 2006)

I was almost expecting him to show up at the end, just so someone could ask "But no-one could possibly survive!", and he could answer "You're forgetting one thing, mate..."

-Hyp.


----------



## Kid Charlemagne (Jul 8, 2006)

The reveal at the end was great, the plot was an utter mess, the fights were good, the effects were great - at times spectacular, like Jack's last shot with the Kraken.  I also loved the "an undead monkey!" gag.  I liked Norrington.  I didn't like Elizabeth much in this film; I thought Keira was mugging an awful lot.  I liked Will more in this film - he really seemed to be in charge, and knew what to do.  I didn't think Jack was nearly as much fun as in the first film.  I'm not sure why, maybe his lines just weren't as good.


----------



## Mean Eyed Cat (Jul 8, 2006)

Just got back and I thought it was a great film.  I'm not sure I like it as much as the first one, but a great flick nonetheless [I'll echo previous posts about the plot being all over the place].

And I'm glad they showed more of my favorite character(s)... Cotton! And his parrot!!!


----------



## Darthjaye (Jul 8, 2006)

Spec-freaking-tacular.   I agree with most so far and would say it ended very well with a nice entrance by our new "cap'un" for the start of the next movie.   Why was the monkey still undead though?    No one else was.   All in all I will go see it at least one more time and would pay full price if necessary to do so.


----------



## coyote6 (Jul 8, 2006)

Darthjaye said:
			
		

> Why was the monkey still undead though?    No one else was.




Dude! I cannot believe you asked that.

The monkey stole a coin from the Isla de Muerta's stash of Aztec coins at the end (the post-credits end) of Black Pearl. Thus, it is still again under the Aztec curse. But it's the only one.

PS: To repeat the review I sent to my group: Fan-freaking-tastic.

The third movie is going to be packed with characters: Bootstrap Bill, Barbossa, Beckett, Davy Jones, Keith Richards' character, probably the Commodore -- never mind that they'll probably be adding characters!

PPS: I have to steal that compass for use as a magic item.


----------



## Darthjaye (Jul 8, 2006)

coyote6 said:
			
		

> Dude! I cannot believe you asked that.
> 
> The monkey stole a coin from the Isla de Muerta's stash of Aztec coins at the end (the post-credits end) of Black Pearl. Thus, it is still again under the Aztec curse. But it's the only one.
> 
> ...




Actually completey forgot about the monkey doing that, but it was in the back of my mind and I was almost gonna turn the movie on and flip to the ending just to see.   

Don't forget Governor Swann and Captain Sao Feng (Yun-Fat Chow) for the next movie.


----------



## Wereserpent (Jul 8, 2006)

Anyone else see the Dog as the leader of the tribespeople after the credits?


----------



## paradox42 (Jul 8, 2006)

On the subject of scenes at the end of the credits, did anybody else stay for the end of the credits of this film and catch the 



Spoiler



return to the island of the savages


?  (Edit: sigh- this is what I get for revising a long post multiple times before submission.)

Oh, and yes, even though the plot was all over the place, I loved finally having a complex movie that didn't insult the audience's intelligence (particularly in a summer blockbuster)! And that was truly my only complaint, aside from having to wait a whole year before seeing how it all ends. The triple-cross (or was it a quadruple-cross?) at the end was one of the most brilliant bits of dramatic irony and characterization I've ever seen in a motion picture. I think this movie is designed to reward multiple viewings, and will likely be testing that hypothesis soon.

And regarding the Kraken, I can't help but wonder how many HD the movie Kraken had in D&D terms- it was clearly advanced into Colossal size, for example.  Not to mention it had some *serious* Regeneration or Fast Healing ability. Oops, my geek is showing...


----------



## KenM (Jul 8, 2006)

I saw it last night, loved it. I did not think the plot was all over the place, you just had to watch the movie to know what was going on.  The only 2 people from the first movie I did not see was the two Port Royal gaurds, but I might have just missed them, anyone know if they were in? 
Also, since the mouth of the kraken reminded me of the sarlac from Return of the Jedi, here is how I think Jack will survivie: 



Spoiler



Jack will meet up with Bobba Fett and they fight they're way out, Bobba Fett then helps jack and the others take out Davey Jones with his armor and weapons.


----------



## WmRAllen67 (Jul 8, 2006)

*Warning-- a long, rambling, spoiler-filled entry follows...*

Saw the late night early preview Thursday, but haven't had a chance to post 'til now...

I concur with the "Empire Strikes Back" feel to the movie-- it seemed to be mostly about character development and setting up the third movie, down to the "need to go off now and find our friend who sacrificed himself so we could get away" ending... 

After one of the Kraken attacks, a fish-man says to Davey Jones "There were (x number of survivors), the sea has claimed the rest", not "the Kraken got 'em", which means to me that folks "eaten" are not necessarily taken as food... even the hat survived a few weeks down the beastie's gullet...

The plot didn't seem convoluted to me, being a straightforward "Find the McGuffin"-- everyone wants the key/ Dead Man's Chest/ what's inside to further their personal agenda...

I felt that many of the "bits" in the movie were played for laughs, like the "circus music" soundtrack behind the swinging cages moment or the "Look--" (BANG!) "Undead Monkey!" bit, but over-all the tone of the movie was darker then the first-- the character development left you wondering who to root for:

Will-- moved from his "black and white" view of the world to accepting the grey areas within himself and others in the first movie, and is solidly in the mode of "our hero", realizing he can be ruthless if he needs to be and break the rules, so long as he knows the goal he is fighting for is a good one... he doesn't develop much in this one, though after the last Black Pearl moment when he sees Elizabeth and Jack in a clutch, he may have to work out accepting that Elizabeth is not exactly who he thought she was...

Jack-- Our protagonist in this movie, his actions drive the plot the way Elizabeth's drove the plot in CotBP. He's become a man without a set goal, now that he has the Pearl, and works as an anti-hero while he determines just who it is he wants to be now-- it isn't until the very end and his "Hero moment" that he goes back to being the "Jack Sparrow" he was in the first movie-- in fact, the whole business with trying to find a new hat can be seen as a symbol of his search; when he regains his hat at the end, he regains his sense of self...

Elizabeth-- loses everything. She's gone far down the path of "betrayers and mutineers" and needs to find some way to recover her sense of self by the end of the movie (I did miss a bit of the final scene in the witch's house at the end, so correct me if I'm wrong about this-- damn "big soda/ too many previews before the film"). Her betrayal of Jack gives him his self-validation though-- even the best of people have a bit of pirate inside...

A minor quibble-- I thought the rationale for Pintel and Ragetti's return was a bit thin, plot-wise-- a minor bit of "Hand-waving" necessary to get the "commentary characters" on the scene... also, the man in the well in Tortuga, though a reference to the ride at Disney World, felt jarring this time, unlike similar references in the last movie...

I also missed Murtog and Mulroy, the two Redcoats from Port Royal, and it doesn't look like they're back in the last movie either-- perhaps they were part of the crew that Norrington lost chasing the Pearl...

From internal cues, the movie is set sometime between 1715 and 1727-- so now that Cutler Beckett has Davey Jones' heart, Britiain is set to "rule the waves" and bring the Golden Age of Piracy to an end, and all the sailors will be "working for the EIC' which they were complaining about at one point during the movie-- the "Empire" is the only force that has accomplished their goals fully at the end of the movie-- the "rebels"/ pirates have been pushed to the edges of the map (comparable to the edge of the galaxy in the final scene of SW:ESB).

I remember reading a while ago that Disney had been sued by members of the Arawak/ Carib tribes over the representation of cannibals in the film, but it's solidly in the literary tradition of the time. The scenes parallel both the depiction of natives in _Robinson Crusoe_ and the movie _The Man Who Would Be King_. Also the "And so they made me their cheif..." line of Jack's in the first movie...

Other movie/ book references-- _Hunt for Red October_ whenever the Flying Dutchman rose from beneath the waves, Elizabeth's "marionette ghost" parallels a scene in Tim Power's book _On Stranger Tides_, the crew of the Dutchman recalls Shakespeare's line in _The Tempest_ about "Full fathom five your father lies... and suffers a sea change," and reaching for your sword only to find it gone, referencing the self-referencing done in _Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom _ about the scene where Indy shoots the Arab swordsman in _Raiders of the Lost Ark_...

With that fairly convoluted sentence, I'll put my inner English Major away... just for the record though, it was a great sequel, and I don't think it hurt the franchise (which I was worried about, seeing how the _Matrix_ thing turned out...). I was also worried that there would be a "cool things for marketing purposes" problem with the fish-men crew, sort of like I felt about the Ewoks in the StarWars movies, but I didn't get that feeling after the movie this time...


----------



## Henry (Jul 8, 2006)

My wife and I saw it yesterday, and were absolutely blown away. It's not often she wants to see a movie twice, but she has been asking me ever since yesterday.  I loved most every scene that everyone above loved, so I'll just add that Barbossa at the end totally threw me. I don't know why, but I was NOT expecting that.

I wonder if they'll cover how he lived past the fatal heart-shot?


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jul 8, 2006)

Henry said:
			
		

> I wonder if they'll cover how he lived past the fatal heart-shot?




I don't think he did. I could be wrong--this is entirely guess-work on my part, not anything I've read or know--but my guess is that Tia Dalma accepted the undead monkey as payment because she needed its link to him in order to resurrect him.

Could be way off, of course, but that was the first thing I thought of when I watched the scene.


----------



## Servitor of Wrath (Jul 8, 2006)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> I don't think he did. I could be wrong--this is entirely guess-work on my part, not anything I've read or know--but my guess is that Tia Dalma accepted the undead monkey as payment because she needed its link to him in order to resurrect him.
> 
> Could be way off, of course, but that was the first thing I thought of when I watched the scene.



Hm, never thought of that. I just guessed that Davey Jones resurrected Barbossa to get him to go after Jack, who (in Jones' mind) has his heart.


----------



## Hand of Evil (Jul 8, 2006)

It's a pirates life for me!  Wonderful plot, fantastic dialog, and excellent scenes and action, that aptured the swashbucking movies of the past.  

All during the movie I was thinking that the dirt was for Davey Jones to set foot on, just how where they going to get it done.  Quite the slieight of hand that!


----------



## nikolai (Jul 8, 2006)

I found this a big disappointment - though it seems like I'm the only one. I really loved the first, but this just didn't come anywhere near. I think perhaps because it was played too much for laughs and because of the way the plot was contorted to get as many characters from the first back as possible. I also think the tone also seemed completely off and variable - sometimes it was very comical, other times very dark, other times as swashbucklery as the original.

Does anyone think it compares well with the first? What did Jack do? The coffin at the beginning, the escape from the cannibals, the fight at the end - and that's it... Just compare it with the first where he's much more 'heroic'. Sorry, but I thought they dropped the ball...


----------



## Servitor of Wrath (Jul 9, 2006)

"You will always remember this as the day that you almost cooked Captain Jack Sparrow!"

Was it too obvious? Was that the reason they didn't use it?


----------



## frankthedm (Jul 9, 2006)

nikolai said:
			
		

> Does anyone think it compares well with the first? What did Jack do? The coffin at the beginning, the escape from the cannibals, the fight at the end - and that's it... Just compare it with the first where he's much more 'heroic'. Sorry, but I thought they dropped the ball...



While very entertaining, Jack is a selfish bastard, this movie just had chance to show it better than the first.


----------



## The Serge (Jul 9, 2006)

I really enjoyed it.  Lots of fun.  Great dialogue.  Smart plotting.  Decent characterizations and development.  Great CGI.  Superb ending.  9 out of 10 for a first watch.

For my part, I think this was superior to the first film.


----------



## John Q. Mayhem (Jul 9, 2006)

KenM said:
			
		

> Also, since the mouth of the kraken reminded me of the sarlac from Return of the Jedi, here is how I think Jack will survivie:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Glad I'm not the only one ^^


----------



## Cthulhudrew (Jul 9, 2006)

KenM said:
			
		

> Also, since the mouth of the kraken reminded me of the sarlac from Return of the Jedi, here is how I think Jack will survivie...




It would be pretty funny if he runs across Pinocchio and Gepetto inside the Kraken (I know, they were swallowed by Monstro the Whale, but still...)


----------



## Wereserpent (Jul 9, 2006)

Ok, wait a sec, the pirate at the end of the movie was the villain from the first movie?  It has been so long since I saw the first movie I have forgotten what he looked like.


----------



## Servitor of Wrath (Jul 9, 2006)

That is indeed Barbossa.


----------



## Agamon (Jul 9, 2006)

I was fairly unimpressed with the first movie and came into this one with less expectations.  That left me less dissapointed, but I was fidgeting in my seat, wondering if it was going to ever end before the second hour was up.  The fight in/on the wheel, while quite silly, was interesting.  Thank God for Kiera Knightly or it would have been nap time.


----------



## frankthedm (Jul 9, 2006)

Cthulhudrew said:
			
		

> It would be pretty funny if he runs across Pinocchio and Gepetto inside the Kraken (I know, they were swallowed by Monstro the Whale, but still...)



I would be amused if he found a spectacled skeleton and a wooden puppet in there. The chance to a Pinocchio reference is a big reason why I suspected Jack's going to enjoy a Jonah-esque ordeal.

So anyone else think Tia Dalma is the real problem? Those teeth look like they have a century worth of decay on them...


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jul 9, 2006)

frankthedm said:
			
		

> So anyone else think Tia Dalma is the real problem? Those teeth look like they have a century worth of decay on them...




I don't know if she's "the real problem," but I'd bet that she's the woman in Davey Jones' past. Not only did I get that impression from the way she told the tale, but I thought--though I could be imagining things--that she had a charm on her table that very much resembled the heart-shaped music box Davey had on his organ.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jul 9, 2006)

Servitor of Wrath said:
			
		

> Hm, never thought of that. I just guessed that Davey Jones resurrected Barbossa to get him to go after Jack, who (in Jones' mind) has his heart.



 I figured that wouldn't have been plausible, because then Barbosa would be in Davy Jones' crew, and would also look like he drowned.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Jul 9, 2006)

Firebeetle said:
			
		

> 5.) Davy Jones, his crew and ship are worth price of admission alone. It's terrific to watch.



I want to steal this. Davy Jones as an NPC? Cool.


			
				Firebeetle said:
			
		

> 2.) There is not full closure at the end, too many plot threads left dangling.



This also bothered me. I knew there'd be another PotC, but I wanted a PotC 2 and a PotC 3, not a PotC 2 and a PotC 2b.

The first movie was good stand-alone, why not each other? Like the MI movies?


----------



## reddist (Jul 9, 2006)

Personally, I thought the scene on the beach with Jack, Will, and the Commodore running in circles and waving their swords at each other while Elizabeth threw stones at them in frustration and Pintel and Ragetti stood in the background watching and making commentary was HYSTERICAL.


----------



## Donovan Morningfire (Jul 9, 2006)

Sorry, but I guess I have to be counted as one of those that won't be gushing with love for this film.

Don't get me wrong, it was an enjoyable summer popcorn flick, but it felt like it suffered from a heavy case of "flash w/o substance."  And what substance there was really only came from knowing the characters in the first PotC.

It did feel like it stretched on a bit too long.  And Davy and his crew weren't quite as impressive as I was hoping, especially if you compare them to the undead pirates in the first one.

The sword-fight scene at the end was impressive and well done (I found myself thinking that Will and Norrington had to be rolling 20's on their Balance checks), and I thought Johnny Depp once again did a wonderful job playing Jack, and Orlando was a lot more comfortable in the role this time around.

I'd say 7 out of 10.


----------



## Remathilis (Jul 9, 2006)

I'll gush: best sequel since Empire Strikes Back. 

Will and Elizabeth both got more development. Norrington was interesting, but I wanted him to take a bath, seriously. Jack was just what I expected. Bootstap was good (however, he reminded me of wormtongue in LotR, same actor?) and Davy was very cool; not as overtly evil as Barbosa, but definitely villanous. The East India Trading commander is pure evil, I wanted to kick his ass so bad...

Triumphs: 

* Look! (BAM) Undead Monkey!
* You can't read. Its the Bible, I get credit for trying!
* The whole Liar's dice scene.
* Any scene with Elizabeth and Jack. 
* The Coffin scene/Jack's Intro. Better than his original, and I didn't think that was possible.
* The Whole Island scene/Waterwheel Fight/Everyone Turning on each other scene. Elizabeth was the pure star there, esp when she's throwinfg stones at them. 
* Barbosa at the end. I loved his character, and I'm glad there will be more of him, and even a chance at redemption...

Failures:
* The Cannibals scene went longer than it needed to.
* There being no ill-will between Pintel and Ragetti and Jack? They were part of the Mutinous crew... 

Overall, I loved it. Getting it on DVD as soon as available. Seeing it again in the theatre, and can't wait to see the third. My second favorite movie series, behind Star Wars and above LotR (sorry, too damn long...)


----------



## Servitor of Wrath (Jul 9, 2006)

Remathilis said:
			
		

> Bootstap was good (however, he reminded me of wormtongue in LotR, same actor?)



So I'm not the only one. Part of that had to be the lighting; his face didn't seem to have quite the same shape as Wormtongue's. 



			
				Remathilis said:
			
		

> * Look! (BAM) Undead Monkey!



Great stuff! 



			
				Remathilis said:
			
		

> * The whole Liar's dice scene.



Very interesting game, that. I'll have to try it sometime.



			
				Remathilis said:
			
		

> Jack's Intro. Better than his original, and I didn't think that was possible.



I'm going to have to disagree here, though not for lack of merit of blowing away the crow.


----------



## Hand of Evil (Jul 9, 2006)

For me one of the scenes that had me rolling was Pintel and Ragetti discussing how to pronounce Kraken, for some reason I could not help thinking that would fit in a D&D movie with drow!


----------



## stevelabny (Jul 9, 2006)

I tried to post the other night and my internet broke.

Amazing. 

THIS is how you spend 150 minutes and your budget. 

Incredibly fun action sequences, giant monsters and look... UNDEAD MONKEY!

While I can understand critics who complain that this movie doesnt have the some feeling of "wow, new and original" that the first does, I'm not sure how any sequel would pull that off. I don't understand complaints of plot-wackiness as it seemed mostly straightforward to me. Most of the characters had their one particular agenda, and Jack and Elizabeth were both unlcear of exactly what they want...as oh so not-subtlely illustrated by the spinning compass.

I would buy the DVD right now and watch all day if I could.


----------



## Darthjaye (Jul 9, 2006)

Good lord, it's good and a hit.   It cleared a 132 million by most estimates.    Best opening ever.    Think I'll go throw more money in their bucket and see it again this week.


----------



## paradox42 (Jul 9, 2006)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> I don't know if she's "the real problem," but I'd bet that she's the woman in Davey Jones' past. Not only did I get that impression from the way she told the tale, but I thought--though I could be imagining things--that she had a charm on her table that very much resembled the heart-shaped music box Davey had on his organ.



You're not imagining things; I noticed that during the movie too. But it didn't even occur to me to connect her with him in that way until I read this post. Very intriguing idea! If she actually is a villian of some kind, one has to wonder what her plan actually is and how it will be revealed (not to mention unravelled)!


----------



## DonTadow (Jul 9, 2006)

frankthedm said:
			
		

> While very entertaining, Jack is a selfish bastard, this movie just had chance to show it better than the first.



I think that as why I liked him more in this movie. In the firmst movie we see jack against the ropes and he is forced to be hoerics. Here we finally get him in his natural envrionment. He has no quest and we see how much of a bastard he truly is. One of the things I remarked on after the movie was how refreshing it was to have a true anti hero.


----------



## nikolai (Jul 10, 2006)

'Heroic' was probably the wrong word for me to use because of the moral connotations. 'Swashbucklery' is probably better. Jack just didn't do much compared to the first film where there was all sorts of dramatic dering-do: the rescue of Elizabeth, escape from Norrington, fight with Will, and so on... In this one we had the escape from the cannibals (very un-swashbucklery and played for laughs), the wheel fight (where he was tepid) and I really can't remember much else.


----------



## Plane Sailing (Jul 10, 2006)

I enjoyed the film, but not as much as I'd expected, and that is because of its 'matrix reloaded' ending.

Not as bad as 'back to the future 2', but definitely less closure for me than 'empire strikes back'. I left feeling that I'd seen half a film rather than a whole film.

I agree that there was some interesting character development, and some fun moments (several laugh-out-loud ones, which is always a good sign in a movie!) but... we'll see how it turns out.

I thought that Tia Dalma was a stand-out turn though. Even with bad teeth she had the most alluring screen presence of anyone, very highly charged.

Cheers


----------



## Kid Charlemagne (Jul 10, 2006)

nikolai said:
			
		

> What did Jack do?




Yeah, Jack was played as the buffoon much more in this film.   He didn't really have any of those awesome moments like in the first film - pretending to steal the one ship so the crew would prep the ship he actually wanted to steal so he could sail away at full speed.  He never really seemed as crazy cool in this one.

Barbossa at the end made me realize just how important he was for the first film.  I don't think Tia Dalma ressurected him.  He must have survived some other way.  Maybe he just dragged himself back up the chest and took an Azteec coin before he kicked, like his monkey.

The beginning of the film felt very "stagey".

I'm not sure anything would have been lost if they had cut the entire cannibal island segment.  The whole thing seemed unnecessary.


----------



## mhacdebhandia (Jul 10, 2006)

Kid Charlemagne said:
			
		

> I'm not sure anything would have been lost if they had cut the entire cannibal island segment.  The whole thing seemed unnecessary.



Hehehe. So it's the Hoth sequence from _The Empire Strikes Back_?

(I've always felt it dragged on far too long.)


----------



## Aeolius (Jul 10, 2006)

Kid Charlemagne said:
			
		

> Maybe he just dragged himself back up the chest and took an Azteec coin before he kicked, like his monkey.




Except you see him eating an apple...so he is very much alive.


----------



## Abraxas (Jul 10, 2006)

> I wonder if they'll cover how he lived past the fatal heart-shot?



My guess is the monkey brought him the coin it took from the chest at the end of the  first movie before he was "all dead".


> Except you see him eating an apple...so he is very much alive.



You see him biting into an apple - whether or not he could enjoy it was unknown. They could eat and drink in the first movie, they just couldn't quench their thirst or slake their hunger.

Overall - I thought the movie was great except for 2 things.

1) The middle of a much longer movie feel to the ending.
2) Elizabeth's character - there were a few secenes where her actions seemed (to me) extraordinarilly contrived, enough to jar me out of enjoying the movie and focus on why they seemed to not fit.


----------



## Banshee16 (Jul 10, 2006)

Awesome movie...I was concerned after hearing some of the reviews, and seeing the rating dropping at Rotten Tomatoes, but I think it was a far better movie than the critics are giving it credit for.

Apparently the public agrees, as the movie has blown several records out of the water with respect to take over one weekend, from what I understand.

A few things were inconsistent though...

1-Why were the guy with the eyball that falls out and his buddy in the crew?  They were the enemy, even at the end of the last film..

2-Why was Elizabeth willing to go after Jack at the end of the movie?  She saw earlier in the movie that he's willing to sell out his friends to save himself....he's not exactly a "good man".  So why act like he was at the end?

3-Will.....has he, or has he not traded away his soul?  He seemed to lose it in the bet, but then he escaped.  Is he cursed now?

Was Jack having a hero moment at the end?  He really was just doing one of the only things he had left as a choice.  He wasn't exactly in a position where he could get away.

So, are Davy Jones and his crew aberrations or undead?

Banshee


----------



## coyote6 (Jul 10, 2006)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> 1-Why were the guy with the eyball that falls out and his buddy in the crew?  They were the enemy, even at the end of the last film..




I wouldn't be surprised if Jack just didn't quite remember who they were. The others didn't really have a chance to say, "these guys have to go" -- when Will comes on the scene, they've barely got enough men to sail the Pearl, and there certainly wasn't time to stop & fight with them, if they were going to avoid the cannibal lunch special. After that, well, they weren't quite acting as enemies -- and they took the Commodore on.



> 2-Why was Elizabeth willing to go after Jack at the end of the movie?




My money's on guilt. Betraying him was tearing her up. I don't think she realized beforehand that she liked him as much as she did, or that she would feel so guilty about sacrificing him.



> So, are Davy Jones and his crew aberrations or undead?




Undead (Augmented Aberrations), maybe? 

Wait, no, they're (Augmented Humanoids), aren't they? Hmm.


----------



## Starman (Jul 10, 2006)

I enjoyed it, but not as much as the first one. It felt like they were trying too hard to top the first one. When I watched the first one, I was blown away at how everything just seemed to flow naturally together, even Depp's crazy over-the-top performance. This one felt like they were trying too hard. Good, but not great. I probably won't go see it a second time in the theater, but will wait for DVD.


----------



## Cthulhudrew (Jul 10, 2006)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> 1-Why were the guy with the eyball that falls out and his buddy in the crew?  They were the enemy, even at the end of the last film..




I suspect it had a little to do with the fact that, when they first showed up, they needed them to help pilot the ship- I don't recall whether or not they had the requisite 6 men the potentially mutinous crewman mentioned during the escape from the cannibals.

After that- why not? It's not as if Jack seemed particularly concerned about the makeup of his crew during the movie. As long as their interests seemed in line with everyone else's, they weren't really a problem.



> 2-Why was Elizabeth willing to go after Jack at the end of the movie?  She saw earlier in the movie that he's willing to sell out his friends to save himself....he's not exactly a "good man".  So why act like he was at the end?




As coyote6 points out, I suspect it was guilt over what she did to him on the Black Pearl. Similarly, I suspect Will's willingness to go along had more to do with him feeling as if he were doing it for Elizabeth rather than for Jack (who he, I think, finally realizes is really a scumbag. Honestly, I still can't quite figure out why they stuck up for him in the end of the first film. I've just never found Jack Sparrow all that charming- and he was even less charming in this movie, where he was way too campy.)



> 3-Will.....has he, or has he not traded away his soul?  He seemed to lose it in the bet, but then he escaped.  Is he cursed now?




He didn't lose to Davy Jones- his father did, when he upped the ante at the end and tried to bluff Davy Jones. Davy himself tells Will that he's free to go- the next time they hit land. 

(Also, I'm not quite sure if I caught it or not, but if Bootstrap hadn't raised the ante- there were 8 5's there, right? So Will would have won?)



> Was Jack having a hero moment at the end?  He really was just doing one of the only things he had left as a choice.  He wasn't exactly in a position where he could get away.




He could have gone back to the island and found Norrington (if he had surmised that Norrington was the one who had stolen the heart) and then been able to bargain his way out of the deal with Jones, possibly. Although I have to agree, it didn't really seem all that heroic, frankly.

I am just wondering how Norrington thought he could possibly get away when he ran off with the heart. I mean, obviously, somehow a passing EIC ship found him, but it seems like quite a chance to take- that island seemed awful remote.


----------



## Truth Seeker (Jul 10, 2006)

*ME want the BLACK PEARL!!!!! ARRggggghhhhhh!!!*


----------



## Plane Sailing (Jul 10, 2006)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> 2-Why was Elizabeth willing to go after Jack at the end of the movie? She saw earlier in the movie that he's willing to sell out his friends to save himself....he's not exactly a "good man". So why act like he was at the end?




When they are on the island, looking for the treasure chest, there is a moment where it seems as if Elizabeth is looking at the 'hearts desire' compass, and finds that it is pointing at Jack... just before she slumps down and says "it isn't working!"

I wondered whether that meant that she was actually developing an attraction for the bad boy of the seven seas.


----------



## Plane Sailing (Jul 10, 2006)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Awesome movie...I was concerned after hearing some of the reviews, and seeing the rating dropping at Rotten Tomatoes, but I think it was a far better movie than the critics are giving it credit for.
> 
> Apparently the public agrees, as the movie has blown several records out of the water with respect to take over one weekend, from what I understand.




Well, you can't really say the public agrees until the second weekend, can you? It is then that you see whether the film has any legs. The opening weekend is pretty much an indication of how much the first film was loved, because there isn't the time for word of mouth to get around about whether it is a stinker or fab movie at that point 

< thinks >
mulls over a number of high profile films he's been to see on the opening weekend based upon how good a previous film was, only to be disappointed. Matrix sequels I'm looking at you.
< /thinks >


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jul 10, 2006)

Remathilis said:
			
		

> Bootstap was good (however, he reminded me of wormtongue in LotR, same actor?)




Nope. Wormtongue was Brad Dourif; Bootstrap was Stellan Skarsgård.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jul 10, 2006)

Plane Sailing said:
			
		

> I wondered whether that meant that she was actually developing an attraction for the bad boy of the seven seas.




[blink]  It never occurred to me that it might mean anything else.

Her 'heart's desire' was wavering between Will and Jack through the course of the movie.

-Hyp.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jul 10, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> [blink]  It never occurred to me that it might mean anything else.
> 
> Her 'heart's desire' was wavering between Will and Jack through the course of the movie.




Blech. The best way for the third movie to absolutely ruin the trilogy would be to have Elizabeth wind up with Jack.


----------



## Hand of Evil (Jul 10, 2006)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> Blech. The best way for the third movie to absolutely ruin the trilogy would be to have Elizabeth wind up with Jack.



Agree.


----------



## Dingleberry (Jul 10, 2006)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> [blink]  It never occurred to me that it might mean anything else.
> 
> Her 'heart's desire' was wavering between Will and Jack through the course of the movie.
> 
> -Hyp.



My take: Elizabeth was worried that her heart was wavering, but it wasn't; the misdirection was that the compass *was* still pointing at the chest - which was buried in the sand between her and Jack.


----------



## satori01 (Jul 10, 2006)

I liked the movie quite a bit.  I do not think it quite gives the same viceral satisfaction the first film does, but it is close.
I like the darker tone, I like that Elizabeth and Will grow up in the film.
I like that so much mystery is left in the film.  We never receive confirmation on how Barbosa is back.  We also never know what it is that has Jack conflicted, or the whole story of Davie Jones.  Jack is decidely not intrested in killing Davie Jones.  Jack generally sticks to the same story the Vodoo Woman says, only after asking what little people know.  It struck me, if people knew something different, Jack would have told more.

Given what the nearly calcified Flying Dutchman Sailor said, it sounds like an uncontrolled Flying Dutchman is a bad thing.  I suspect that killing Davie Jones, might make you the next captain of the Flying Dutchman.  I would not be surprised if in the the Third Movie either Barbossa or Jack become the next Davie Jones.

I like the evil East India Trading company villain, a perfect behind the scenes, manipulator.  I love the fact that the Pirates were Pirates in this movie.  Cotton, who always seemed to be a very honorable guy, did not blanche one bit when Jack sent Will over to 
"pay his debt" or the fact that Jack was willing to trade innocent souls to Davie Jones.

The casting was great, I love Skaarsgard and Nighy, thought they were well cast.  Nighy has such distinctive blue eyes, I recgonized  him right away as Davie Jones from his eyes.

Overall a great second movie.  A compelling, exciting, and most importantly Fun film, that really sets the stage well for the third movie.


----------



## sniffles (Jul 10, 2006)

I'd read a number of uncomplimentary reviews before seeing the movie, and came away from the film wondering what movie the reviewers had seen. I really didn't find any of the flaws they complained of. It did suffer slightly from 'middle movie syndrome', but I still hugely enjoyed myself. 

Bill Nighy was simply awesome as Davey Jones. I can't wait to see him face-to-face with Geoffrey Rush in the next film.


----------



## frankthedm (Jul 10, 2006)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> Blech. The best way for the third movie to absolutely ruin the trilogy would be to have Elizabeth wind up with Jack.



Like Jack's chaotic alignment will let him be tied down.  He's steal a ship and flee at the first martial spat.


----------



## IcyCool (Jul 10, 2006)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> Blech. The best way for the third movie to absolutely ruin the trilogy would be to have Elizabeth wind up with Jack.




Kiera Knightly wanted to kiss Johnny Depp.  So much so, in fact, that it was in her contract.  I suspect that is the real reason that Elizabeth kissed Jack.  Hopefully, that's as far as she and Jack go.  She doesn't have to wind up with Will, but please don't let her wind up with Jack.


----------



## KenM (Jul 10, 2006)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> Blech. The best way for the third movie to absolutely ruin the trilogy would be to have Elizabeth wind up with Jack.




 I think that in the next one: 



Spoiler



capt. Jack will marry Elizibeth and Will on the Black Pearl 2


----------



## shilsen (Jul 10, 2006)

frankthedm said:
			
		

> Like Jack's chaotic alignment will let him be tied down.  He's steal a ship and flee at the first martial spat.



 Pun unintended, Frank?


----------



## Banshee16 (Jul 10, 2006)

Cthulhudrew said:
			
		

> I suspect it had a little to do with the fact that, when they first showed up, they needed them to help pilot the ship- I don't recall whether or not they had the requisite 6 men the potentially mutinous crewman mentioned during the escape from the cannibals.
> 
> After that- why not? It's not as if Jack seemed particularly concerned about the makeup of his crew during the movie. As long as their interests seemed in line with everyone else's, they weren't really a problem.




I suppose that's possible...



			
				Cthulhudrew said:
			
		

> As coyote6 points out, I suspect it was guilt over what she did to him on the Black Pearl. Similarly, I suspect Will's willingness to go along had more to do with him feeling as if he were doing it for Elizabeth rather than for Jack (who he, I think, finally realizes is really a scumbag. Honestly, I still can't quite figure out why they stuck up for him in the end of the first film. I've just never found Jack Sparrow all that charming- and he was even less charming in this movie, where he was way too campy.)




This is something I was really confused by.  I actually liked Jack in the first movie, in that beloved rascal kind of way.  He was a sympathetic villain at the very least.  In this movie he truly *did* sell out Will....and Elizabeth....to a truly horrible fate.  It's really hard to correlate that with him being a "good guy".  I don't think I'd be able to trust someone like that myself.  Maybe Elizabeth did realize she likes him better than she thought....or it was just an inconsistency.

Will....hopefully he realizes that Jack really isn't a good guy.  Unfortunately, it felt like there was tension between him and Elizabeth at the end, based on the kiss.  During the film my girlfriend was crying out "what are you doing?!!" at that moment.



			
				Cthulhudrew said:
			
		

> He didn't lose to Davy Jones- his father did, when he upped the ante at the end and tried to bluff Davy Jones. Davy himself tells Will that he's free to go- the next time they hit land.
> 
> (Also, I'm not quite sure if I caught it or not, but if Bootstrap hadn't raised the ante- there were 8 5's there, right? So Will would have won?)




Ok, thanks for clearing it up.  I misunderstood that part.  I thought both father and son lost.  I've never heard of this Liar's Dice game before, so I didn't understand the significance of Will's father getting involved.  



			
				Cthulhudrew said:
			
		

> He could have gone back to the island and found Norrington (if he had surmised that Norrington was the one who had stolen the heart) and then been able to bargain his way out of the deal with Jones, possibly. Although I have to agree, it didn't really seem all that heroic, frankly.
> 
> I am just wondering how Norrington thought he could possibly get away when he ran off with the heart. I mean, obviously, somehow a passing EIC ship found him, but it seems like quite a chance to take- that island seemed awful remote.




That's something I'm not sure of.  I mean....he was trapped on the boat by the manacles, the kraken arrives, the boat is in it's clutches.  He's the only target it has to catch, so there are no redshirts around to divert its attention.  I'm not sure he really had a choice.  I'm not sure if the final moment was heroism, since I still don't think there were any alternatives, except lie down and die.  He seems to have chosen to laugh at death, and go down fighting....but I'm not sure it had anything to do with saving the others.

Banshee


----------



## Banshee16 (Jul 10, 2006)

Plane Sailing said:
			
		

> When they are on the island, looking for the treasure chest, there is a moment where it seems as if Elizabeth is looking at the 'hearts desire' compass, and finds that it is pointing at Jack... just before she slumps down and says "it isn't working!"
> 
> I wondered whether that meant that she was actually developing an attraction for the bad boy of the seven seas.




It's possible...I wondered that as well.  But then Jack looked at the compass and it was pointing at her.  And she moved, and it turns out that the chest was right under her butt.  So was it pointing at each other because of attraction, or because she was sitting on the chest?

Due to his popularity, I guess Jack is supposed to be the hero, though Will seems the traditional hero.  At least he has honour, integrity, etc.

Banshee


----------



## Hand of Evil (Jul 10, 2006)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> It's possible...I wondered that as well.  But then Jack looked at the compass and it was pointing at her.  And she moved, and it turns out that the chest was right under her butt.  So was it pointing at each other because of attraction, or because she was sitting on the chest?
> 
> Due to his popularity, I guess Jack is supposed to be the hero, though Will seems the traditional hero.  At least he has honour, integrity, etc.
> 
> Banshee



With the compass, it really comes down to the 'the question/want' and the way it is answered - like a wish, it is all in the phasing.


----------



## Banshee16 (Jul 10, 2006)

Plane Sailing said:
			
		

> Well, you can't really say the public agrees until the second weekend, can you? It is then that you see whether the film has any legs. The opening weekend is pretty much an indication of how much the first film was loved, because there isn't the time for word of mouth to get around about whether it is a stinker or fab movie at that point
> 
> < thinks >
> mulls over a number of high profile films he's been to see on the opening weekend based upon how good a previous film was, only to be disappointed. Matrix sequels I'm looking at you.
> < /thinks >




That's a valid point.  However, I'm not positive that it will happen here.  I went with a group of 6 people, ranging from fans of the genre to people just looking for a fun film, and all around everyone was speaking very positively when they left.  My fiance commented that she thinks she liked the first one better, but she still liked this one.  She just wasn't sure if she liked the first one more because it was brand new, or something else.

Throughout the theatre, energy seemed to be pretty high leaving.....didn't hear any griping.

It doesn't have a super plot like some other movies, but for what it is, a fun, romping swashbuckler, I think it did the job pretty well.  There were a few points looking around that I saw people wiping tears out of their eyes from laughing so hard, like with when they were trapped in those cages on cannibal island, etc.

I guess we'll see.....I just think sometimes that critics seem to enjoy trashing popular films, then telling us we should like some other film that actually puts many people to sleep.  Maybe that's why I'm not an art critic.  I don't really think the movies are an appropriate place to be educated anyways, so I go to be entertained.  

Banshee


----------



## sniffles (Jul 10, 2006)

IcyCool said:
			
		

> Kiera Knightly wanted to kiss Johnny Depp.  So much so, in fact, that it was in her contract.  I suspect that is the real reason that Elizabeth kissed Jack.  Hopefully, that's as far as she and Jack go.  She doesn't have to wind up with Will, but please don't let her wind up with Jack.



I think it's also the classic "nice girls like bad boys" cliche. Not a train of thought I've ever really understood, but evidently a lot of other women do feel that way.


----------



## Man in the Funny Hat (Jul 10, 2006)

I will likely see it again - there's too much in there that threatens to be overlooked otherwise.  I must agree with others about the plot.  It was hopelessly talky in comparison to the first and seemed rather directionless - like it was largely just necessary filler; an extended exposition for next years conclusion rather than a movie trying to stand on its own merits.  As a result it felt much too long for me and thus in turn the pacing was jarringly inconsistent.

The decision to go the darker, "Empire Strikes Back" route is a bold one.  It mostly works.  It may work even better when it can finally be combined as but one part of a trilogy because sadly it DIDN'T stand as well on its own as I would have hoped.  But it was still good.


----------



## Banshee16 (Jul 10, 2006)

sniffles said:
			
		

> I think it's also the classic "nice girls like bad boys" cliche. Not a train of thought I've ever really understood, but evidently a lot of other women do feel that way.




Bad boys are like a make work project..

Banshee


----------



## WayneLigon (Jul 11, 2006)

I liked it a lot, and everyone else in the theater seemed to as well. I went tonight (a Monday) at 5:00 and the theater was packed. They'd sold out of the next two showings, in fact, as people were getting tickets early and then going for dinner. The whole theater clapped when Barbarosa showed up; nobody had really been 'spoiled' apparently, so he came as a total surpise.

The theater must have been running behind or something because they cut it off right at the first credit. Was there anything after the end of the credits, like in the first movie?


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone (Jul 11, 2006)

Great fun ... even with some pacing issues and a plot with a few too many tentacles.

One thing I'm taking away from this one: every D&D campaign needs an undead monkey.


----------



## TheAuldGrump (Jul 11, 2006)

frankthedm said:
			
		

> I would be amused if he found a spectacled skeleton and a wooden puppet in there. The chance to a Pinocchio reference is a big reason why I suspected Jack's going to enjoy a Jonah-esque ordeal.
> 
> So anyone else think Tia Dalma is the real problem? Those teeth look like they have a century worth of decay on them...



My assumption was that like Bloody Mary she chewed Betel nuts, or a similar substance. Her teeth were not decayed, but rather stained. (As evidenced by similar stains around her lips.)

And if by her being the real problem, I assume you mean that she 



Spoiler



was the love that Davey Jones lost his heart to


?

The Auld Grump


----------



## RigaMortus2 (Jul 11, 2006)

I wasn't too pleased with PotC2.  The first one was a lot better IMHO.

I don't like the way it started off.  Unless I missed it, they never explained what that place was that Jack escaped from in the very beginning (a prison of some sort)?  Or why he was there.  Obviously to get a drawing of a key, but why did he go there to get it?

I also don't like how Will and Elizabeth got arrested.  Seemed like they put that in there just for conflict purposes.  They were charged with helping Jack escape in the 1st movie.  Now obviously if that was such a crime, they would have known about it and not hung around.  Did anyone else think that Will (and maybe Elizabeth) would become pirates along with Jack at the end of the 1st movie?  Sorta like Will embracing his heritage.  I thought for sure it would start out with Will and Jack pirating together...

Other complaints...  Jack was basically evil.  At the end of Pirates1, he seemed to have redeemed himself.  Now, since it is a new movie, they have to make him bad again, so he can once again redeem himself.  Seemed sort of contrived.

I kept thinking of the animated Sinbad movie (the one with Brad Pitt and Catherine Zeta Jones).  It reminded me a lot like that.  Sinbad was a scroundrel, Jack was a scroundrel.  Sinbad redeemed himself, Jack would eventually redeem himself.

I thought the mosters looked really fake.  The undead pirates in the first movie looked a lot cooler.  The close up shots of Davey Jones and his crew were actually pretty good, but it was the shots where there were a lot of CGI characters on the screen at once, or the shots from farther away which looked fake to me.

I also thought the action sequences weren't as abundant.  The mill wheel scene, them fighting off the kraken, and the fight on the beech were all good, but not really spectacular.  But most of all, I wanted more.  They were probably saving it for Pirates3.

I did like how they brought back most of the characters from the first one.  Even the minor characters you didn't think you'd ever see again.  The two comic relief pirates were great, and I almost forgot about Norrington until they reintroduced him.

Ever since the Matrix sequels, I haven't been a fan of unresolved plots.  I agree with the previous poster who said they didn't want to see Pirates 2a and Pirates 2b.  They should have made 2 and 3 their own seperate movies with their own seperate plots and resolutions.  Oh well...  Blame that one on Matrix   

That was pretty much it.  All in all I thought it was okay.  Not as good as the first.  I will probably see it again when my friend goes, just incase there were things I missed.


----------



## paradox42 (Jul 11, 2006)

WayneLigon said:
			
		

> The theater must have been running behind or something because they cut it off right at the first credit. Was there anything after the end of the credits, like in the first movie?



Yes. I think it was mentioned on page 1 of this thread, but at the very end of the credits for this movie you see the dog on the cannibal island made up like Jack and sitting in the chief's throne. Just a cute apparently throwaway scene like the monkey stealing the coin, but it could potentially mean something for movie 3.


----------



## KenM (Jul 11, 2006)

RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> I wasn't too pleased with PotC2.  The first one was a lot better IMHO.
> 
> I don't like the way it started off.  Unless I missed it, they never explained what that place was that Jack escaped from in the very beginning (a prison of some sort)?  Or why he was there.  Obviously to get a drawing of a key, but why did he go there to get it?




  He went there to get a drawering of the key because he probibly knew his time was drawing short with Davey Jones. So he wanted to try and so something to break his agreement with Davey ASAP.


----------



## mhacdebhandia (Jul 11, 2006)

TheAuldGrump said:
			
		

> My assumption was that like Bloody Mary she chewed Betel nuts, or a similar substance. Her teeth were not decayed, but rather stained. (As evidenced by similar stains around her lips.)



I liked that look. She was very sexy, all together.


----------



## Henry (Jul 11, 2006)

KenM said:
			
		

> He went there to get a drawering of the key because he probibly knew his time was drawing short with Davey Jones. So he wanted to try and so something to break his agreement with Davey ASAP.




The backstory was probably something like, "Jack learns that someone in the prison of such-and-such-a-pirate-warlord knows the secret to Davey Jones' power." So jack goes off to get as much info as possible.


----------



## Quasqueton (Jul 11, 2006)

Just want to chime in and add my "absolutely loved this movie" comments to the thread.

I like how many comments/plot in this movie really fit in well with the previous movie -- no jiggering around to make it fit. It's almost like it was planned as a trilogy from the beginning. Like how Davy Jones threw the, "And you announced yourself as *Captain* Jack Sparrow all that time."

When Jack was running from the cannibals on the beach, my wife leaned over and giggled, "I love the way Jack runs."

Just all in all, for me, a terrifically fun movie. I will go see it again in the theater.

Quasqueton


----------



## Hand of Evil (Jul 11, 2006)

Saw the news last night and found out that there were a number of people here in South Carolina that dressed up and went.  I have only seen that with Star Wars.


----------



## DonTadow (Jul 11, 2006)

RigaMortus2 said:
			
		

> I wasn't too pleased with PotC2.  The first one was a lot better IMHO.
> 
> I don't like the way it started off.  Unless I missed it, they never explained what that place was that Jack escaped from in the very beginning (a prison of some sort)?  Or why he was there.  Obviously to get a drawing of a key, but why did he go there to get it?



Sorry you didnt like it, but it kinda irks me that eveyrone wants everything explained. It seems that it was some kind of prison he escaped from. It wasn't important waht it was, so long as the audeience knew it was a deadly place and jack escaped, thus solidifiying his adventrious nature is still intact. 


> I also don't like how Will and Elizabeth got arrested.  Seemed like they put that in there just for conflict purposes.  They were charged with helping Jack escape in the 1st movie.  Now obviously if that was such a crime, they would have known about it and not hung around.  Did anyone else think that Will (and maybe Elizabeth) would become pirates along with Jack at the end of the 1st movie?  Sorta like Will embracing his heritage.  I thought for sure it would start out with Will and Jack pirating together...




They were under the protection of their father and essentially thought they had amnesty. The movie and this scene also plays a big part in showing the "changing" of the world from these small little nooks and crannies to a more global world. This is an important scene in that it opens up the entire plot of how small the world is really getting. 



> Other complaints...  Jack was basically evil.  At the end of Pirates1, he seemed to have redeemed himself.  Now, since it is a new movie, they have to make him bad again, so he can once again redeem himself.  Seemed sort of contrived.



Well er, he is a pirate. In d and d terms he's pretty neutral to neutral good throughout the movie. He's a pirate out for himself following the pirate creed. There's no such thing as a laweful good pirate. I liked the character a little more in this movie because of that. Greys are always better than cookie cutter in my book. I"m surprised he came back at the end. It solidified that he's still a hero,but he doesnt have to adhere to the alignment. One thing to remember is that in the first movie Jack was forced to be "good" and we really didnt see him in his real envionrment. If they repeated that they'd have the same movie as part one with no real character development. Instaed we get Jack as a pirate in his real environment.



> I kept thinking of the animated Sinbad movie (the one with Brad Pitt and Catherine Zeta Jones).  It reminded me a lot like that.  Sinbad was a scroundrel, Jack was a scroundrel.  Sinbad redeemed himself, Jack would eventually redeem himself.



Eh, I go for the real character feel. No one changes their behavior completely over a span of a few years, thus I'm more into Jack maintaining what makes him himself, which is the fact that he's always a wild card. Perhaps facing death will bring him a few steps closer to good, but the movie would abandon itself if it put Jack in goody goody land. 



> I thought the mosters looked really fake.  The undead pirates in the first movie looked a lot cooler.  The close up shots of Davey Jones and his crew were actually pretty good, but it was the shots where there were a lot of CGI characters on the screen at once, or the shots from farther away which looked fake to me.



??? Ok, did you think they looked fake or just not as cool? They definatly did a better job with the makeup, robitics and cgi in this movie with their bigger budget. Coolness is a matter of preference. I actually liked the fish creatures better because of their creativity. Anyone cna throw a bunch of skeletons at a party for an encounter but wierd lookind Saughins, man thats cool.


> I also thought the action sequences weren't as abundant.  The mill wheel scene, them fighting off the kraken, and the fight on the beech were all good, but not really spectacular.  But most of all, I wanted more.  They were probably saving it for Pirates3.



 The movie was 2 and ahalf hours long and had 4 to 5 really elaborate action sequences. They have tomake time to set up the plot. 



> I did like how they brought back most of the characters from the first one.  Even the minor characters you didn't think you'd ever see again.  The two comic relief pirates were great, and I almost forgot about Norrington until they reintroduced him.



How Ironic is it that my only flaw is your only weekenss. I thought the DM (director/screenwriter) hand waved some thngs to get everyone in there. A bit too much irony for me but it didnt take away. 



> Ever since the Matrix sequels, I haven't been a fan of unresolved plots.  I agree with the previous poster who said they didn't want to see Pirates 2a and Pirates 2b.  They should have made 2 and 3 their own seperate movies with their own seperate plots and resolutions.  Oh well...  Blame that one on Matrix
> 
> That was pretty much it.  All in all I thought it was okay.  Not as good as the first.  I will probably see it again when my friend goes, just incase there were things I missed.



I guess the world is spoiled with too many thrown together sequals to appreciate a good arc. That's been my biggest irking reading some of the negative reviews. (too many dangling plot threads ect). WAsn't the problem with the Matrix trioligy was that they all felt disjointed. Now that we have linking that we havn't seen since STar Wars, its as if no one can hold thier attention spans over a three year period. I got a filling that if the arc isn't as simple as it was with LOTR (ok their going ot hte mountain and fighting sardion) that we won't see many good complex arcs anymore. 

The main plot of this movie was finding the dead man's chest. There were lots of innerlocking plots to connect the movies but that was the main one. The first movie's main plot was finiding that treasure.


----------



## Aeolius (Jul 11, 2006)

DonTadow said:
			
		

> ...it kinda irks me that eveyrone wants everything explained.... Greys are always better than cookie cutter in my book....I actually liked the fish creatures better because of their creativity....I guess the world is spoiled with too many thrown together sequals to appreciate a good arc.




   I am in agreement with your entire response.

   The first movie gave us skeletons and, admittedly, the scenes where the skeletons walked beneath the waves were bloody brilliant. The second movie gave us a wider variety of henchmen; personally, I liked "Hermit Crab Head".

   As a DM, I like a thousand dangling subplots; some to be resolved quickly while others linger like bad cheese. How well would the second Matrix, Star Wars, or LoTR films done as standalone flicks, I wonder?

   Pirates 2 was every bit as spectacular as it's predecessor, simply for different reasons.


----------



## Hand of Evil (Jul 11, 2006)

Sci-fi poll on Sci-Fi Wire (www.scifi.com) is to rate the movie, at this time, 28% of the voters are saying Too Much Plot!


----------



## Agamon (Jul 11, 2006)

Though I wasn't a fan of the movie, I had no problem with the ending.  Why must movies have a finality to them when you know there's going to be another one?  If it had ended like that with no plans for a sequal, yeah, that sucks.  But it'll continue, so what's the big deal?  I don't hear people complain about cliffhanger endings to serial TV show seasons.  You still need to wait to find out what happens. :\


----------



## TheAuldGrump (Jul 11, 2006)

This movie be brought to you by pieces of eight, and the letter 'arrr'!

I find it hard to fault a movie, based in part on the old pirate serials, for not wrapping up its plots.  I had a great deal of fun, I really hope we see more of Tia Dalma (a safe hope methinks  ). 

Best line - "I love those moments. I like to wave at them as they pass by!' Jack Sparrow is chaotic (borderline between good and neutral on the other axis) and in 7th Sea terms is a Scoundrel with a fair number of scoundrel points.  I have pulled out Skull & Bones, the Split Eye maps of the 1600s, and the cardstock pirate ship by World Works games and am thinking about working out a bit more of my S&B/CoC D20 game. In CoC terms Jack is minus a few Sanity Points.

I may see this yet a third time in a week or so.

The Auld Grump


----------



## ThirdWizard (Jul 12, 2006)

And to think, way back people were all like "A movie based on a Disney theme park attraction? That's gonna suck!" Heh

I loved the movie.


----------



## Hand of Evil (Jul 12, 2006)

ThirdWizard said:
			
		

> And to think, way back people were all like "A movie based on a Disney theme park attraction? That's gonna suck!" Heh
> 
> I loved the movie.



Don't forget the fear and 'oh my god' momnets when the trailers and hints of Depp's Captain Jack started to come out in the first one.  The teeth, the dress, the talk, oh my.


----------



## DonTadow (Jul 12, 2006)

Hand of Evil said:
			
		

> Don't forget the fear and 'oh my god' momnets when the trailers and hints of Depp's Captain Jack started to come out in the first one.  The teeth, the dress, the talk, oh my.



Hmmm given this logic, maybe I'll keep an open mind to snakes on a plane.


----------



## Quasqueton (Jul 12, 2006)

> Jack Sparrow is chaotic (borderline between good and neutral on the other axis)



I’ve seen others make a similar statement on Jack’s alignment. Jack is not Good at all. At *best*, he’s Chaotic Neutral.


> People who are neutral with respect to good and evil have compunctions against killing the innocent but lack the commitment to make sacrifices to protect or help others. *Neutral people are committed to others by personal relationships.*



Funny how everyone overlooks his willingness to turn over 100 souls (including Will Turner) to save his own. One hundred souls, to the devil! And look at the first four he managed to get – none of them bad people (as in evil).

It’s amazing how much we’re willing to overlook the darkness in someone because we like them.

I loved the movie, and thoroughly enjoy Jack Sparrow – but I definitely recognize that he is *not* a good guy, by any stretch of the imagination.

Quasqueton


----------



## Hand of Evil (Jul 12, 2006)

Quasqueton said:
			
		

> I’ve seen others make a similar statement on Jack’s alignment. Jack is not Good at all. At *best*, he’s Chaotic Neutral.
> 
> Funny how everyone overlooks his willingness to turn over 100 souls (including Will Turner) to save his own. One hundred souls, to the devil! And look at the first four he managed to get – none of them bad people (as in evil).
> 
> ...



To quote Captain Jack - hum, pirate.


----------



## DonTadow (Jul 12, 2006)

Quasqueton said:
			
		

> I’ve seen others make a similar statement on Jack’s alignment. Jack is not Good at all. At *best*, he’s Chaotic Neutral.
> 
> Funny how everyone overlooks his willingness to turn over 100 souls (including Will Turner) to save his own. One hundred souls, to the devil! And look at the first four he managed to get – none of them bad people (as in evil).
> 
> ...



Good eye. I watched that scene intently too to see if any of these people "movie wise" were bad. The drunk "maybe" but everyone else was just normal folk. I take away my borderline. He's well into neutral terroritary.


----------



## John Q. Mayhem (Jul 12, 2006)

Jack's a great example of how a Chaotic Evil person can fit into a more normal adventuring party. 



Spoiler



The CE thing's mostly a joke. I think Jack's actually CN with evil and good tendencies warring within. He's tugging towards Good in PotC 1, Evil in PotC 2).



I really liked this movie, expecially the end. I loved the "I like to wave at them as they pass by." 

One thing, though...I can't remember if the Kraken sinks the Black Pearl or just eats Jack and leaves.


----------



## DonTadow (Jul 12, 2006)

John Q. Mayhem said:
			
		

> Jack's a great example of how a Chaotic Evil person can fit into a more normal adventuring party.
> 
> I really liked this movie, expecially the end. I loved the "I like to wave at them as they pass by."
> 
> One thing, though...I can't remember if the Kraken sinks the Black Pearl or just eats Jack and leaves.



The pearl looked to be sinking but I am not sure if the entire sinking was on screen. It was eluded that the pearl sunk in the epilogue conversation.


----------



## Arnwyn (Jul 12, 2006)

I found this movie to be quite enjoyable. Lots of great moments, and great dialogue.

There were definitely some problems: the story was a little messy, it ran a little longer than necessary, and (one of the more heinous sins, IMO) was that some of the more important story elements were told by people who were almost completely incomprehensible. I could understand Davey Jones _mostly_ (though he had some garbled speech) but I found that Voodoo Chick to be completely unacceptable. She was supposedly telling an interesting story, but I needed frickin' subtitles to understand her. Very unfortunate. (Yes, I know some of you will respond and babble "Well, *I* understood her just fine." Whatever - I don't care. I have enough data points pointing to it being a problem.)

Otherwise, the movie was fantastic. I missed the monkey stealing the gold at the end of the credits (even on a repeated DVD viewing), so I was confused about that, but I'm glad it's been cleared up for me - that aspect made the movie even better. (And I'm glad I stayed to the end of the credits of this one, even though I hoped the dog was eaten.)

I was particularly impressed with the number of recurring characters, which is always something I enjoy. The return of Norrington (especially in his more grizzled state) was especially cool.

I was confused for a second about Barbossa returning ("wasn't he shot dead?!"), but thankfully my translator (read: wife) understood what Incomprehensible Voodoo Chick was saying, so I'm glad for that. Barbossa indeed did die, and seemingly went to "Land's End" which seems to be sort of like the 'land of the dead'. He returned, and thus is now alive. The heroes propose to do the same with Jack - and need Barbossa because "he knows those waters" - since he came from there already.

Thanks a bunch, Incomprehensible Voodoo Chick.

My favorite scenes were the whole cannibal sequence (nothing ever beats a giant pirate-filled ball rolling down the hill) and the three-way combat at the church/mill. The action sequences were simply stunning in this movie, with brilliant cinematography and camera angles. Brilliant, I say!


----------



## WayneLigon (Jul 12, 2006)

After Elizabeth locks him to the mast I was sure Jack was going to have to cut his hand off to get free, neccesitating... a hook.


----------



## shilsen (Jul 12, 2006)

Saw the movie yesterday and enjoyed it thoroughly. 

And am I the only one who thought that the perfect way for a PC to die in battle is to say, "Hello, beastie!" and leap into a giant monster's maw?


----------



## RangerWickett (Jul 12, 2006)

WayneLigon said:
			
		

> After Elizabeth locks him to the mast I was sure Jack was going to have to cut his hand off to get free, neccesitating... a hook.




Me too!

I loved the voodoo woman's accent. She spea ksli kthe wor dsen din a differen tpla sthan they actually do. I want to practice that accent.

My only problem was the guy who tried to tell Will where the Black Pearl was during that one 'searching montage.' His accent was very thick.


----------



## Banshee16 (Jul 12, 2006)

Hand of Evil said:
			
		

> To quote Captain Jack - hum, pirate.




Right....pirate...evil...check.

In the first movie, I liked Jack....in this one, although I like him because he's funny, from a moral standpoint, I find him reprehensible, and the "justified outrage" part of me wants him to get what's coming to him.

Turning over innocents to the devil to save his own skin.....quite despicable and utterly criminal.

He's a pirate, and the movie's about pirates so he's a protagonist.....but in this movie he seemed more like the villain than he did in the first movie.  Then, he was more of a rascal than anything.

The whole giving up innocents thing turned me against him in this movie.

Of course someone will point out he was willing to trade Will in the first movie....but that wasn't trading in souls....and it was one guy, and it was more obvious that it was part of a larger plan, and at least to me, I didn't really think he was going to actually do it.  This time around, it felt more like Jack actually *would* follow through.

Banshee


----------



## The Grumpy Celt (Jul 12, 2006)

Arnwyn said:
			
		

> ...Voodoo Chick to be completely unacceptable.




Phoey on you. You want them to eat the dog and dislike Tia Dalma (aka Voodoo Chick). Phoey on you I say!

I understood every word she said and I thought she was Dead Sexy, much sexier than Miss Swann (aside from her teeth).

I believe they will explain - in the next movie - why Barbosa is alive again and what Lord Beckett (sp?) is doing and oh Lordy do I every hope we get some more Tia and her Jamacian + Cajun x 2 = accent.

By the by, Tia Dalma was performed by Naomie Harris, mosted noted for her performance of Selena in _28 Days Later_ and will be appearing in _Miami Vice_ (the film to be released later this summer) and as such is the only possible thing that could get me to see that movie.

(One of Grumpy's many weaknesses is an attraction to women who can hurt him.)

I thought the cannibal island section went on too long and wondered why everyone seemed so set on getting Jack back (given everything he did), but the movie was a lot of fun.


----------



## mmu1 (Jul 12, 2006)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Of course someone will point out he was willing to trade Will in the first movie....but that wasn't trading in souls....and it was one guy, and it was more obvious that it was part of a larger plan, and at least to me, I didn't really think he was going to actually do it.  This time around, it felt more like Jack actually *would* follow through.




Hmm... To me, it didn't really feel like he'd go through with it this time, either. He promised Davey Jones something outlandish that he knew he almost certainly wasn't going to be able to deliver, and then - instead of, say, rounding up the population of some small settlement, women, children and all - he made a spectacularly half-hearted attempt at filling his quota with pirate-wannabe scum.

Also, I think you're reading too much into the whole "soul" business - he wasn't, I think, selling souls per se, just delivering a 100 unlucky bastards to serve the "100 years before the mast", not their souls into hell. And at the very least, they'd get the same choice as the guy with the rosary did.


----------



## Darthjaye (Jul 12, 2006)

The Grumpy Celt said:
			
		

> I understood every word she said and I thought she was Dead Sexy, much sexier than Miss Swann (aside from her teeth).
> 
> I believe they will explain - in the next movie - why Barbosa is alive again





Gotta agree on the Miss Swann not being so sexy.   Not sure what it is, but aside from the fact that she needs something more than skin and bones (which in ercent interviews and photos as well makes her look fairly sickly and unattractive) she also has this thing she does with her jaw that (I'm not sure if anyone else notices it either) but makes her look likes she's grating her teeth even when she talks.   Don't get me wrong, she's cute, but I'm not gonna agree with anyone who says sexy.

As for the Barbosa thing, in an interview they let it slip that they'd explain his ressurection by Tia in the next film.   My guess, like a few others by now, is that Tia used the monkey and the pair of boots we see in the background in an earlier scene on their visit to her, to cast a spell and bring back our dearly departed Captain.   I'm also in agreement that she may well be the love of Davey's life we've heard about.


----------



## Darthjaye (Jul 12, 2006)

mmu1 said:
			
		

> Hmm... To me, it didn't really feel like he'd go through with it this time, either. He promised Davey Jones something outlandish that he knew he almost certainly wasn't going to be able to deliver, and then - instead of, say, rounding up the population of some small settlement, women, children and all - he made a spectacularly half-hearted attempt at filling his quota with pirate-wannabe scum.
> 
> Also, I think you're reading too much into the whole "soul" business - he wasn't, I think, selling souls per se, just delivering a 100 unlucky bastards to serve the "100 years before the mast", not their souls into hell. And at the very least, they'd get the same choice as the guy with the rosary did.





Agreed, he did go out of his way to get the scum of the earth to deliver to Davey.   And they had an option to chose to die rather than go into servitude on his crew.   This doesn't make Sparrow a hero, but does at least make him maybe Chaotic Nuetral in D&D terms.   He does a little good here, and little bad there and it all balances out.   

He wasn't a wanted man in the first movie cause he was a lovable swashbuckler and I think people forget that he was hated by a lot of people and still is.   He does what he does to survive.   Heck, he's swayed Swann into making a decision she hated and becomming something she thought she wasn't, he's made the Commodore a truely unrespectable man, and made Will a hunted man.   Chaotic Nuetral I say!!


----------



## Bront (Jul 13, 2006)

Galeros said:
			
		

> Anyone else see the Dog as the leader of the tribespeople after the credits?



Doh!  And I didn't stay 

I may have to go again just for that.


----------



## DonTadow (Jul 13, 2006)

I personally dont think he was trying to round up 'scum" per say, I think that thats the only port he pretty much can get the black pearl into without any ruckus.  

Sad thing is, in hindsight, I see the PCs in my game doing this if something important depended on it. And they "claim" their a good party.


----------



## Henry (Jul 13, 2006)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Turning over innocents to the devil to save his own skin.....quite despicable and utterly criminal.




Bah! A trifle, indeed. 'e would've had his freedom in a hundred years or so, mate! 


Still, if we're talking D&D alignments, more Chaotic Neutral than Chaotic Evil (as one poster said), because to me evil alignment implies a preference to harm others for its own sake; Jack usually does things to save his own skin, and neutral is typified by strong self-interest.


----------



## Arnwyn (Jul 13, 2006)

The Grumpy Celt said:
			
		

> Phoey on you. You want them to eat the dog and dislike Tia Dalma (aka Voodoo Chick). Phoey on you I say!
> 
> I understood every word she said



Heh. I've already predicted you, and pre-dismissed you (and RangerWickett as well):


			
				Arnwyn said:
			
		

> (Yes, I know some of you will respond and babble "Well, I understood her just fine." Whatever - I don't care. I have enough data points pointing to it being a problem.)






> and I thought she was Dead Sexy,



Irrelevant, of course, when important story elements are (barely) coming out of her mouth.



> and oh Lordy do I every hope we get some more Tia and her Jamacian + Cajun x 2 = accent.



Me too, as long as she's garbling unimportant stuff.


----------



## The Grumpy Celt (Jul 13, 2006)

Arnwyn, not every one speaks in a psuedo-American Midwestern accent. One should delight in diversity and rejoyce in regionalisms, such as accents.

In any event, I thought the caninal island bit slowed the entire movie down and could not understand why anyone would want Jack Sparrow back at the end. And I think Barbosa was already alive when they visited earlier Tia - I think those where his boots, he was in them and had his feet up. I wonder what Sexy Swamp Lady has cooking.

Something else to consider, Davy could visit Tia. He could not set foot on land, but her hourse was over apparently (slowly) running water in a swamp. So if she was the woman who rejected him way back when, then he could likely still visit her. Maybe she is a sister to him, or the woman who rejected him, or maybe she just introduced them.


----------



## WayneLigon (Jul 13, 2006)

The Grumpy Celt said:
			
		

> Something else to consider, Davy could visit Tia. He could not set foot on land, but her house was over apparently (slowly) running water in a swamp. So if she was the woman who rejected him way back when, then he could likely still visit her.




The 'not set foot on land but once every 10 years' idea was cool, and I think that's why she gave Jack the jar of dirt. It's 'land' and so could protect him from Davy in a pinch (All he'd have to do was pour it out and stand on it). I would have liked to see that scene  

_Jack: (Pours out dirt and stands on it) Sorry, can't get me here! They say no man is an island but I seem to have one here. My own little island, hee.

Davy is initially stymied as he tries to get Jack. Reaches for a bucket, tosses it on Jack, water washes away the dirt, leaving Jack on the deck. Davy grins. "Ye were sayin'....?"_

I still loved that he wouldn't give it up, even though it was just a jar of dirt 

I also thought that initially the (presumably love) letters in the outer chest would prove to really be his 'heart'. Maybe that will still be true.


----------



## Arnwyn (Jul 13, 2006)

The Grumpy Celt said:
			
		

> Arnwyn, not every one speaks in a psuedo-American Midwestern accent. One should delight in diversity and rejoyce in regionalisms, such as accents.



This is a canard, and has nothing to do with the problem. (And I agreed with you about seeing her again - how's that for "rejoicing"?)


----------



## frankthedm (Jul 14, 2006)

WayneLigon said:
			
		

> I also thought that initially the (presumably love) letters in the outer chest would prove to really be his 'heart'. Maybe that will still be true.



Same here!


----------



## frankthedm (Jul 14, 2006)

RangerWickett said:
			
		

> His accent was very thick.



Not as thick as the drunkard in _Dagon_! I had turn the subtitles on for that scene.


----------



## Man in the Funny Hat (Jul 14, 2006)

shilsen said:
			
		

> Saw the movie yesterday and enjoyed it thoroughly.
> 
> And am I the only one who thought that the perfect way for a PC to die in battle is to say, "Hello, beastie!" and leap into a giant monster's maw?



It is also the perfect way for a PC to be born, as it were.  My swashbuckler, Dycron, was inspired by the brief bit from Willow, where Madmartigan looks down at the dragon from the bridge, sighs quickly, then leaps with a scream on top of it.  That one moment contains the distilled essence of Dycron whose favorite tactic ended up being to leap spectacularly over the front line of combat, die, then wait patiently for the other PC's to retrieve his corpse.  Again.


----------



## Man in the Funny Hat (Jul 14, 2006)

Arnwyn said:
			
		

> Thanks a bunch, Incomprehensible Voodoo Chick.



And the Jar-Jar Binks award goes to...


----------



## Banshee16 (Jul 14, 2006)

Darthjaye said:
			
		

> Agreed, he did go out of his way to get the scum of the earth to deliver to Davey.   And they had an option to chose to die rather than go into servitude on his crew.   This doesn't make Sparrow a hero, but does at least make him maybe Chaotic Nuetral in D&D terms.   He does a little good here, and little bad there and it all balances out.
> 
> He wasn't a wanted man in the first movie cause he was a lovable swashbuckler and I think people forget that he was hated by a lot of people and still is.   He does what he does to survive.   Heck, he's swayed Swann into making a decision she hated and becomming something she thought she wasn't, he's made the Commodore a truely unrespectable man, and made Will a hunted man.   Chaotic Nuetral I say!!




That doesn't make him chaotic neutral.  Maybe Neutral Evil.  So maybe it's true that they had a choice...serve for 100 years, or die.  That's not a choice.  Anyone putting 100 innocents in that position to save themselves is evil.

What is *not* evil about that?  It's basically giving them a choice between slavery to an unholy monster for 100 years, or death.

Banshee


----------



## Sir Brennen (Jul 17, 2006)

Finally got around to seeing PotC this weekend (though, judging by the box office, so did a couple of other people.) My wife's overall summation: "There was too much slime." 

It was good, a bit over-long, great effects. I was really impressed with the scene of Will trying to get the key from the sleeping Davy Jones, having a hard time trying to figure out how much of the tentacles were real and how much CGI.

I don't think it was _that_ great, though, and thought the first one was better from a character & humor point of view. Cap'n Jack had a few too many "I know that you know that I know..." style ramblings that just weren't as clever as alot of his lines in the original. And a menacing villian with a sense of humor were a good part of the first movie, as well. ("the Code is more what you'd call 'guidelines' than actual rules....") Some of the scenes during the island battle had me cracking up, though, especially when there would be a pause or double take as some other combatants ran or rolled through.

I do have to agree with the poster about Incomprehensible Voodoo Lady. I got the gist of alot of it, but she could have toned down the accent just a wee bit. Besides _28 Days Later_, the actress was also in the Pierce Bronson movie _After The Sunset_, where her Island inflections were much more understandable.

A lot of critics complained about Bloom and Knightley's characters not really given much to do in this one, but I thought they had plenty of effect on the plot, even it if was mostly in reaction to Jack's schemes and betrayals.

Someone mentioned the Indiana Jone's reference when Mz. Swann reached for her missing sword (which also happened to Pintel and Ragetti when they confronted her earlier, didn't it?) But did anyone notice _how many_ Indiana Jone's references there seemed to be? Or just simply images which called to mind things from those films?

-Running from the cannibals (could almost hear "Launch the ship, Cotton! Launch the ship!")
-Groping for missing weapon and grinning sheepishly
-Will riding hidden on the bow of the Flying Dutchman (like Indy on the Nazi sub)
-Rolling cages reminiscent of the Indy boulder sequence
-Disembodied beating heart image from Temple of Doom
-Jack's concern over his hat (though it was a nice play on the theme that Cotton was going to turn the boat around for the hat but Jack was too scared)

There were a couple of others my wife pointed out, who is really the big Indy Jones fan. Anyone else think of any?

Of course, there were other movie references - Will slowing his fall with a knife in the sail (like about every Errol Flynn pirate movie), and even Disney's own _20,000 Leagues Under the Sea_ with the Kraken attacking the ship. And didn't Davy Jones even say something like "Release the Kraken!", similar to a line from _Clash of the Titans_? Oh, and of course, hermit-crab head evoked images of John Carpenter's _The Thing_.


----------



## Elemental (Jul 17, 2006)

Dingleberry said:
			
		

> My take: Elizabeth was worried that her heart was wavering, but it wasn't; the misdirection was that the compass *was* still pointing at the chest - which was buried in the sand between her and Jack.




Also, I think the direction the needle is pointing in is the one that Will shows up from, a few minutes later.

If only the compass had a distance indicator.  



			
				Aeolius said:
			
		

> The first movie gave us skeletons and, admittedly, the scenes where the skeletons walked beneath the waves were bloody brilliant. The second movie gave us a wider variety of henchmen; personally, I liked "Hermit Crab Head".




Anyone else have _Young Ones_ flashbacks when he's trying to direct his body to recover his head?

My favourite bit was the tense standoff between Elizabeth and two of Jack's crew over the heart. Then the wheel rolls past, everyone stares in disbelief for a few seconds, and they then pick up where they left off.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jul 18, 2006)

Elemental said:
			
		

> Also, I think the direction the needle is pointing in is the one that Will shows up from, a few minutes later.




Remember, the first time the compass points at Jack for Elizabeth, it's on the Pearl... and he's standing sternward of her.

In other words, in the opposite direction to the way the ship is heading, which is towards the chest.

-Hyp.


----------



## The Grumpy Celt (Jul 19, 2006)

Man in the Funny Hat said:
			
		

> And the Jar-Jar Binks award goes to...




Ah! A pox on yer and your's! How dare ye... eh... How dare you compare that sexy, busty, dangerous woman to the icon of fan dispair from Star Wars? She could not have possibly been that bad. I mean, the hate for Jar Jar is wide spread and deep. I find it hard to believe that the acromony for Tia could reach that point, let alone that it already has.

By the way, the sequel will star Chow Yun Fat.


----------



## Sandain (Jul 19, 2006)

Why couldn't Jack use the compass to find the chest?   What his heart desired was the key? or Elizabeth?


----------



## TheAuldGrump (Jul 19, 2006)

Yeah, on rewatching it I have come to agree that Jack is at best Chaotic Neutral, though he may yet be redeemed.

And, my, didn't 



Spoiler



Barbosa look smug eating that apple?


 

The Auld Grump


----------



## Relique du Madde (Jul 19, 2006)

I'm not really sure why it worked the way it does, but I have some theories..

 - JAck's "desires" the Black Pearl (it only shows him the direction of the pearl)
 - Elizabeth "desires" Will/Jack/"Freedom" (Her heart's confused which is why it fluctated often)

Now, *MAYBE* it requires two people to use properly for the purpose of finding Davy Jones's Heart.  The one person has to hold the compass (thus establishing a base line to what he/she desires) and the second person's own desire adjusts the reading so that it points to an object that can fulfill both desires.. SO....

  Elizabeth Alone-----------> Jack/Will/Freedom
  Jack Alone ---------------> The ability to sail the black pearl unchallanged*

  Jack + Elizabeth ---------> Common Desire:"Freedom from Davy Jones"

Now since Jack and Elizabeth both desired freedom from Davy Jones (to some extent) the compass then pointed to the item which can fullfill that desire, Davy Jones's heart.

*At this point Davy Jones is the strongest threat to Jacks Ability to sail the Black Pearl.  When he looks at the compass it goes wild since *everyone* is a potential threat ("eh, pirate") or because while over water there is no escape from Davy Jones (since it would point to the source of the threat).


----------



## Firebeetle (Jul 20, 2006)

ThirdWizard said:
			
		

> And to think, way back people were all like "A movie based on a Disney theme park attraction? That's gonna suck!" Heh




Don't forget "The Country Bears." Sometimes as a father you must do things that are a horrendous ordeal, and that was one of them. I still shudder. Although the lyric "her name was Lola, she was a show-bear" was pretty funny.


----------



## Eridanis (Jul 22, 2006)

Just caught this last night. Maybe it was because I was really tired, but I wasn't that impressed. I thought that the plot was strung too tight, and needed some room to breathe; it was point-to-point-to-point without any letup to let you digest it.

The waterwheel fight was a perfect example. When it was happening, I was thinking "hey, this is the moment the filmakers want you to think is a cool set-piece fight. It's OK, but not great." At that moment, I should have been thinking, "Cool fight!" rather than metagaming about it. But maybe that was just me.

I loved the kraken. Man, oh man,a great illustration of how to present a monster that's really unkillable; the best to you hope to do is deal with it well enough to get some part of your party out alive. Loved the images (and squishy sound effects) of its tentacles grasping and pulling the ships apart. Very powerful and well-done.

And thank you to those who also found Voodoo Chick sexy. I was humorously shaking my head as I left the theatre wondering why I thought she was sexier than Elizabeth, bad teeth and all. Glad to know I'm not the only one. 

Still, I enjoyed it, and I'll definitely see the third film next year.


----------



## Wereserpent (Jul 22, 2006)

I found Tia Dalma to be hawt too!!!


----------



## Man in the Funny Hat (Jul 22, 2006)

The Grumpy Celt said:
			
		

> Ah! A pox on yer and your's! How dare ye... eh... How dare you compare that sexy, busty, dangerous woman to the icon of fan dispair from Star Wars? She could not have possibly been that bad. I mean, the hate for Jar Jar is wide spread and deep. I find it hard to believe that the acromony for Tia could reach that point, let alone that it already has.



Nah, it wasn't that bad.  I understood it.  I'd not have mentioned it but for all the comments from others about not understanding her.  She at least CONTRIBUTED strongly to the movie, albeit while difficult for some to understand, while he-who-shall-not-be-named-again was a clear detraction every second he was on screen or his voice was heard.


----------



## Rackhir (Jul 24, 2006)

The necklace that Tia had on the table was nearly identical to the one that Davy Jones had. But I have a suspicion that it isn't her necklace, otherwise she'd have been wearing it. Though by the law of character conservation she is the most likely candidate for Davey's love, she just doesn't feel right to me for some reason. Elizabeth however has not directly met Davy though, so there might be some sort of reincarnation thing going?

Jack stole a ring from Tia, which I'm sure will factor in somehow in movie 3 since it didn't in this film. 

I knew that Geofrey Rush was in the movie, but I thought that he was doing the voice for Davy. So the ending still took me by surprise.

Still had a blast at the film. I love Jack Davenport (He was terrific in Ultraviolet - The BBC miniseries, not the Mila film and of course "Coupling"). Both he and Orlando Bloom, seemed much more at home in this movie and didn't suffer from the curse of bland whitebreadess that aflicted them in the first movie.


----------



## frankthedm (Jul 24, 2006)

TheAuldGrump said:
			
		

> Yeah, on rewatching it I have come to agree that Jack is at best Chaotic Neutral, though he may yet be redeemed.



A delightful mix of 3E CN _free spirit_ and 2E CN _Off the rocker_ with enough foul deeds that only those in denial can call him good.

Just resaw Secret Window. Man, Depp is good at mental illness!


----------

