Looking for a specific film review? CLICK BELOW

0-9 A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z / Trailers / DVD Store


July 20, 2007
Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End (2007)
Should I see it?
No.




This final installment of the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise left me more disappointed than a beer vendor at a Baptist convention. Even if you liked the first two Pirates of the Caribbean movies, this one will still probably let you down.

Johnny Depp reprises his role as Captain Jack Sparrow and fills the screen once again with his performance. The problem is that even a wildly popular character cannot mask a thin script. Numerous loose ends from their previous film Dead Man’s Chest proves too much to for screenwriters Terry Rossio and Ted Elliot to overcome. To force a resolution to their sprawling narrative, the writers introduce new characters, conflicts and rules that are simply inorganic when held against the previous films. By the end of this outing it is clear that it is a good thing the franchise is going away.

This film is proof that it is possible to have too many spokes in your narrative wheel. It’s a bad thing when your audience needs a scorecard to keep track of all of the competing plots and characters.

Go back and watch the original Pirates of the Caribbean and ignore this fumbling mess.


Worldview: Just like the previous film this movie promotes a view that moral relativity rules the universe. The original film’s line of thought that the pirate’s code is more of a set of suggestions fuels this piece. Everyone is out for themselves, while there are brief moments of sacrifice, any semblance of actual goodness is vacant. When one looks at the behavior of the “good guys” they are not far removed from the villains. The only thing that makes the protagonists good is that our attention is pushed their way. In the world of this film there are no good people.

In the world of this film there is also no God. There are plenty of curses and odd afterlife notions but God is not present. Instead of being rescued from the price of their sins by the blood of Christ, this film shows that their pals can save people – if their pals really try hard. I always find it interesting that filmmakers are likely to casually mention sin, curses and the devil but can’t quite muster the logic to speak of Christ standing against these things.


Production Notes: The main reason this film is so scattered is that doesn’t have much to do with the first film. As mentioned in my review of Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest, the three films form a three-act structure. The first film is the opening act and this film is the final act. Literally, this film not being deeply connected to the first (by narrative) is no different than telling the story of Snow White and ending the tale with the resolution from Cinderella. It’s confusing and unrelated.

The characters are the same throughout the films but the story is too transitory to maintain any sense.


Cautions: This film contains cartoon violence, but it is dark. The violence isn’t gory but the nonchalant attitude towards killing may be disturbing. There is a brief moment of sensuality between two characters involving the male lead passionately kissing at the leg of the female lead.

As with the previous films, the biggest concern with this work is the godless worldview which allows for the casual violence and whatnot. The afterlife is considered to be a pliable plane of existence that can be manipulated and molded by human endeavor. Since this is the case one’s morality in this world isn’t of concern. You can always have your punishment absolved if you’re well connected and people will come to your aid.


Other Reviews:
Reel.com
Film School Rejects


Kiera Knightly movies:
Bend it Like Becham (2002)
Domino (2005)




Labels: , , , , ,


posted by Michelle Obama's Left Nut at 10:10 AM



0 comment(s)


Share






July 19, 2007
Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest (2006)
Should I see it?
Only if you loved the first film.


It’s just like the first Pirates of the Caribbean movie except without the upbeat tone, rock solid structure, fun or proper lighting.

There is a clear break with the original production. It is apparent this is an afterthought. In other words, the first film wasn’t made to naturally lead into this piece. This leaves this film with a number of awkward moments where they attempt to retain the rules and characters from the first film while also forcing items in to develop a new narrative to set up the next film in the series.

Director Gore Verbinski seems uncontrolled with his action sequences to the point that his sword fighting scenes actually become tedious. Jack Sparrow and company become oddly dressed versions of Jackie Chan in some instances where they perform amazing acrobatics while fighting. The sequences move from interesting, to silly, to belligerently stupid.

This film will probably entertain but it won’t do much else. This is a lesser product than the first film and it is sorely obvious with each frame. This said, its still a better production than most Hollywood efforts these days.


Worldview: It is the same as the first but without all of the obfuscation. Jack Sparrow, a raping, thieving, murderer is celebrated as a positive character. While he is not revered as a good man, the film does promote his wickedness as a mere humorous character flaw.

Unlike the first film, there are almost no good people in this installment. Each character is out for themselves and themselves only. The only person trying to do actual good is Will Turner but he’s a secondary character and in the midst of the pirates his efforts are muted.


Production Notes: This is a dark movie. The reason for that is because it is the second film of three. When you have a trio of films that share the same narrative (the original Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, Back to the Future, etc.) you’ll find the second is always the darkest (Empire Strikes Back, The Two Towers, Back to the Future II – the one where Biff controls the world). The reason for this is because this film is in essence the second act if you look at the films as one collective whole. Stories come in a number of acts. The act structure is simple. The first act is the opening, where everything is explained and the hero is given a task. The second act is the middle where the conflict occurs – this is a dark time where the hero may or may not be victorious. The final act is where the hero and company do final battle with the villain and eventually win. Again, this second film is the second act and therefore a dank view of the hero’s world.

Sit back and think of the second film in any series of movies and you’ll see this pattern emerge.


Cautions: There’s plenty of cartoon violence. In the beginning there are a couple scenes of horrific gore. A man gets his eye plucked out by a crow, for example. Following the very dark opening, the violence becomes more goofy. There’s no sexual imagery or cursing to be concerned about. The worst thing to be mindful of with this film is the backward worldview where good is bad and bad is good.


Other Reviews:
The Flickering Wall
ScreenIt


Orlando Bloom Movies:
Haven (2004)
Troy (2004)
Kingdom of Heaven (2005)


Labels: , , , , ,


posted by Michelle Obama's Left Nut at 6:44 AM



0 comment(s)


Share






July 15, 2007
Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl (2003)
Should I see it?
Yes, but cautiously.



This production is founded in one of the best written scripts to come out of Hollywood in ages. Screenwriters Terry Rossio and Ted Elliott manage a complex plot buttressed by thrilling dialog. This is a great script if you are looking to instruct yourself in how to write for the movies.

The film itself is a fun romp. Johnny Depp steals the show in his now famous performance as the wobbly Captain Jack Sparrow. Bright, exciting and perfectly paced, this film is a great pick if you’re looking for something that will leave you upbeat.


Worldview: This sticky wicket here is the treatment of piracy. In the context of the film, it would seem that pirates are a rebellious but relatively harmless lot. With Jack Sparrow (who casually admits to being a thief, murderer and rapist in the film) shown in such an adoring light this film sells a low bill of goods. Be mindful that the overall point of the film is that doing evil is good and being good is stupid. Note when you watch the film who is the good guy and who is the bad guy. What are the qualities that make them who they are? You will find the film is more than it first appears.


Production Notes: I’ll continue with my gushing over the script for a bit. It is a fantastic work. Forgiving the horrible message, this script, on a technical level, is a marvel. It is perfectly balanced and is thoroughly thought out. If you have the DVD on hand, listen to the screenwriters commentary as the final credits roll. You will get a full version of the backstory* to this piece.

* - A backstory is, in essence, the story that happens before the story you’re viewing has begun. Star Wars would be the backstory to The Empire Strikes Back, is a clumsy example.


Cautions: There’s plenty of comical violence and some undead running around. The film is not littered with offensive acts of sexuality or violence. The core issue to contend with is the message of the film. Again, piracy is a good thing is the effective point of the piece. This selling of evil as good deserves some caution before you view the film.


Other Reviews:
Nehring the Edge
PopMatters
Movie Mom's Review


Johnny Depp Movies:
The Astronaut's Wife (1999)
Blow (2001)
Secret Window (2003)


Labels: , , , ,


posted by Michelle Obama's Left Nut at 1:09 PM



0 comment(s)


Share