"Pirates of the Caribbean: At
Directed by Gore Verbinski.
Written by Ted Elliott and Terry Rossio.
Starring Johnny Depp, Orlando Bloom, Keira Knightley and Geoffrey
Release Year: 2007
Review Date: 5/31/07
I won't lie to you--I was disappointed by
"Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End" [which will be referred
to in this piece as "Pirates 3"] because it was NOT complete dogshit.
After ranking the second "Pirates" flick,
"Dead Man's Chest", in the shitastic category of things like
"Back to the Future 3", "Sniper 3",
Revolutions" and other truly awful sequels, I was excited to see
just how bad the third "Pirates" film was going to be. And
while it is completely overblown, occasionally nonsensical and so
long you momentarily believe that the "Lord of the Rings" films were
actually 20-minute sitcoms, "Pirates 3" is slightly redeeming
because it has Chow Yun-Fat, a couple of decent laughs, some pretty
cool special effects and the promise (more likely just my hope) that
this will be the last "Pirates" film I will have to sit through.
I can't even really summarize the plot for
you, but I do know that most of what's important in this film has to
do with the treasure chest that holds the heart of pirate Davy Jones
(played again by Bill Nighy) and the ship that Jones commands, The
Flying Dutchman, which apparently is indestructible and resides
under the ocean and ferries the souls of the dead around the open
seas in ten-year increments. The good guys have our man
Sparrow (Johnny Depp), the lovely Elizabeth Swann (Keira Knightley),
and the love interest, Will Turner (Orlando Bloom), plus the gang of
rag-tag shipmates that populated the first two films...whatever.
Even as I write this, I realize that none of this matters, because
the plot--or the appearance of said plot--is secondary only to
taking $10 from my pocket and making me suffer through an insane
amount of fluffy horseshit posing as a "script." In terms of
the writing, the second two "Pirates" films are so far below the
first film that I have to really struggle to remember why I liked
the first "Pirates" film so much in the first place. Truly
At two hours and 45 minutes, my knees were
aching and I sat in my seat wondering why Disney didn't pay to have
someone edit this film...but, as stupidly loud and pompous as this
film is (not to mention violent for what appears to be a light PG-13
for the family), "Pirates 3" does have a few moments that I thought
were kinda cool, and the third film seemed to do a slightly better
job of sticking with our money train in this franchise, Depp.
There are a couple of random Sparrow-gone-mad sequences that are
funny only because Depp is so good; he inserts his kooky brand of
humor for this character in enough spots to keep you awake. We
get Chow Yun-Fat for about five minutes, which is always great for
me, and the tentacle face effects of the Davy Jones character, to
me, is still the coolest thing to come out of these movies from a
I don't think that "Pirates 3" is worth
seeing; there aren't a lot of revelations that come out here that
you don't see coming, and in any franchise where dying means that
it's only a matter of time before everyone gets exhumed and raised
from the dead anyway, it's hard to take anything that happens
seriously (aka "the drama"). But, for $5 on a Saturday
afternoon--note, the WHOLE afternoon--"Pirates 3" ain't too bad.
Thank goodness the big three threequels are over...now, maybe we
could get a little (sorta) fresh entertainment?
Comments? Drop me a line at
Bellview Rating System:
"Opening Weekend": This is
the highest rating a movie can receive. Reserved for movies that
exhibit the highest level of acting, plot, character development,
setting...or Salma Hayek. Not necessarily in that order.
"$X.XX Show": This price
changes each year due to the inflation of movie prices; currently,
it is the $9.50 Show. While not technically perfect, this is a
movie that will still entertain you at a very high level.
"Undercover Brother" falls into this category; it's no "Casablanca",
but you'll have a great time watching. The $9.50 Show won't win any
Oscars, but you'll be quoting lines from the thing for ages (see
"Matinee": An average movie
that merits no more than a $6.50 viewing at your local theater.
Seeing it for less than $9.50 will make you feel a lot better about
yourself. A movie like "Blue Crush" fits this category; you leave
the theater saying "That wasn't too bad...man, did you see that
Lakers game last night?"
"Rental": This rating
indicates a movie that you see in the previews and say to your
friend, "I'll be sure to miss that one." Mostly forgettable, you
couldn't lose too much by going to Hollywood Video and paying $3 to
watch it with your sig other, but you would only do that if the
video store was out of copies of "Ronin." If you can, see this
movie for free. This is what your TV Guide would give "one and a
"Hard Vice": This rating is
the bottom of the barrel. A movie that only six other human beings
have witnessed, this is the worst movie I have ever seen. A Shannon
Tweed "thriller," it is so bad as to be funny during almost every
one of its 84 minutes, and includes the worst ending ever put into a
movie. Marginally worse than "Cabin Boy", "The Avengers" or
"Leonard, Part 6", this rating means that you should avoid this
movie at all costs, or no costs, EVEN IF YOU CAN SEE IT FOR FREE!
(Warning: strong profanity will be used in all reviews of "Hard