Forum Home

Master Index of Archived Threads


PIRATES OF CARRIBEAN 2


1 * - series should be scuttled and sunk to the bottom of the sea 1 votes

2 ** - Knightley is nice but not nearly enough 4 votes

3 *** - Depp is a dandy dandy, film is fine 1 votes

4 **** - Aye, matey, a treasure chest chapter in a super series 1 votes

5***** - Errol who? Amongst the best pirating pictures yet produced! 1 votes

Vic Sage
Jul 10 2006 09:25 AM

I didn't much care for the first one, beyond Depp's performance. But this one makes the first one seem like THE SEA HAWK.

The movie ends without finishing the story, such as it is, thus rendering the entire film a setup for a 3rd chapter in this uninspired FX-laden series. This isn't friggin LORD OF THE RINGS. Waiting around for the 3rd chapter isn't going to keep me up nights.

Though i did hear they're getting Keith Richards to play Depp's dad in the next one.

Vic Sage
Jul 10 2006 09:27 AM

i had a 5 ***** rating that seems to have gotten lost in the poll posted above....

it was:
> 5***** - Errol who? Amongst the best pirating pictures yet produced!
Please write it in if your so inclined to give it that vote.

Admins, can the poll be edited?

Vic Sage
Jul 10 2006 09:29 AM

By the way, here's an earlier thread about PIRATE MOVIES:

http://cybermessageboard.ehost.com/geta ... .php?t=911

Elster88
Jul 10 2006 09:41 AM

I really liked the first one. Mainly for two reasons....Depp's performance of course, and because I had never seen Keira Knightley before. Being introduced to her would've been enough by itself.

She's pretty



Haven't seen the second yet.

--------------------
Keira Knightley almost turned down a part in 'Pirates of the Caribbean'.
The actress - who is on a worldwide tour promoting the sequel, 'Dead Man's Chest', to the 2003 hit - says the fact the film was based on a theme park ride put her off.

She said: "I was like, 'Wait a minute, you're doing a pirate movie, something that hasn't worked in about 50 years, and it's based on an amusement park ride?!"

The star - who was nominated for an Oscar this year for her role as Elizabeth Bennet in 'Pride and Prejudice' - was also convinced the original film was going to be rubbish.

She revealed to America's New York Daily News newspaper: "Orlando and I were sitting next to each other at the premiere, which was the first time I'd seen it, and we'd had a big talk and decided that if it was awful, we'd still leave the theatre all smiles.

"Halfway through the film, I nudged him and said, 'It's quite good, isn't it?' and he was like, 'Yeah, it's really good'. We had no idea it would work."
The first movie, 'Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl', eventually made $650 million worldwide.

The second film opens this month, while a third instalment - tentatively titled 'Worlds End' - is due for release next year.

Edgy DC
Jul 10 2006 10:38 AM

Knightly would've been right to turn it down, I imagine, 50,000,000 Elvis fans be damned.

Really, what's Disney's battting average for sequels, Pixar collaborations aside?

I'm sure every teenager in Christendom (and half of Islamabad) went out to see it this weekend, so what do I know, but I'm pretty disinterested.

metirish
Jul 10 2006 10:41 AM

It pulled in $132 million over the weekend, that's a record, I didn't go and won't either as the first one was not all that good and Depps acting wore on me after a while.

Willets Point
Jul 10 2006 10:45 AM

The first one caught by surprise because I expected it to be bad and it was actually quite entertaining. I can't imagine that lightning in a bottle will be caught twice.

Vic, I think the pollstarter can edit polls as long as no one has voted (and it looks like you already got that fixed).

Elster88
Jul 10 2006 11:28 AM

Edgy DC wrote:
Knightly would've been right to turn it down, I imagine, 50,000,000 Elvis fans be damned.

Really, what's Disney's battting average for sequels, Pixar collaborations aside?

I'm sure every teenager in Christendom (and half of Islamabad) went out to see it this weekend, so what do I know, but I'm pretty disinterested.


All of that, too, but she was talking about turning down the original.

Edgy DC
Jul 10 2006 11:47 AM

I understand that, and my opinion is that her first instinct (also mine) was right artistically (a spinoff of an amusement park attraction, ugh), though clearly wrong financially.

Elster88
Jul 21 2006 10:34 AM

Not impressed.

soupcan
Jul 28 2006 10:46 AM

I gave it 2 stars.

The first one was much, much better, this one was too long., the special effects/makeup were out of this world however.

Benjamin Grimm
Jul 28 2006 10:53 AM

Too long. Too slapsticky. Had its moments of fun, though. I was torn between giving it 2 and 3 but went with 3 because my son liked it, and he's more of the target audience.

MFS62
Jul 28 2006 10:54 AM

Edgy DC wrote:
Really, what's Disney's battting average for sequels, .......?



At least (I don't think) they ever tried for TRON II.

Later

Benjamin Grimm
Jul 28 2006 10:56 AM

I think most Disney sequels have gone directly to video or DVD.

MFS62
Jul 28 2006 11:05 AM

Yancy Street Gang wrote:
I think most Disney sequels have gone directly to video or DVD.


And then quickly to remainder bins in video stores or to flea markets.

Later

Centerfield
Dec 29 2006 08:19 AM

Awful.