Cool News
PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN 2: DEAD MAN'S CHEST Opening Weekend Talkback!!!
SPOILER ALERT !!
Hey folks, Harry here with your talkback for PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN 2. Obviously - the below talk back will venture into spoilers and what happens in the film, so for those of you that didn't contribute to the largest opening day in history yesterday... Well, I s'pose you are probably heading out today or tomorrow to see this film. Wait to come back here, till after you've seen the film.
For those of you that are staying to celebrate or denigrate this DEAD MAN'S CHEST - welcome and enjoy. I love the film and felt the first time it flew by... leaving me shocked that it was 2 and a half hours long. I never felt it. And I'm set to go see it in Digital in a few hours. Enjoy speculating about the Asian pirates, their curses and mysticism for the next film, if you think the film will delve into that? Have we seen the last of Davey Jones? Will we meet the woman he cut his heart out for and who or what would she be? And what of Jack Sparrow? What do you think happened in the moments after we last saw him - and is the obvious, what really happened? Enjoy, speculate and discuss it all. Enjoy...
-
+ Expand All
-
Lotta hype - bad movie
-
I liked it, but not as good as the first film.
-
I liked it. Having a funny feeling that there were a myrid of setups in the film that will be paid off come next year.
-
that's CRAZY
-
but isnt complete and really shouldnt even be judged until after the conclusion next summer. impressive box offce. i couldnt beleive jack went down with the pearl, and then barbossa! wow, im so glad i avoided those spoilers. cant wait to see how its all wrapped up next summer
-
Since I really liked Superman a lot, seems hard to top that...but this looks good.
-
So glad YOU avoided the spoilers? What about the people that haven't seen the movie yet? Just fucked it up for them....
-
I just want someone to beat Spider-Man and Spider-Man 2. Pirates will kick the shit out of their opening weekends and it will be wonderful. Wonderful. Wonderful.
-
How did he come back to life? It seemed like he was definitely dead at the end of the first movie. As for the second movie not being as good as the first one, I think that's in part due to the fact that it's basically the first half of a movie. Whereas the first movie was a self-contained story, this movie is setting up the third movie. DMC was good, but hopefully when viewed in context of the third movie, it'll be great!
-
Thats what all the people dressed as pirates had when Balbosa hit the screne at the end. Have to wait a whole fucking year for the 3rd. Harry Potter, Pirates 3, and Spiderman 3 all in the same summer? Oh shit I think I just had an Orgasim !! http://www.youtube.com/user/DarthEvilDead
-
Pretty much every character had a secret agenda all their own, and basically stabbed everyone else in the back, albeit temporarily to get what they needed. There was literally no one character that was 100% on the up and up in this movie, which was somewhat interesting.
-
There's already a POTC 2 talkback a few articles down. Merrick beat you to it...
-
To all those who dont know...Pirates the Caribbean the Ride at Disneyland and Disney World (In my wonderful city of Orlando).. Have been updated for the movie. Their are 3 Jack Sparrow AA's, 1 Balbossa, and a Davy Jones special effect (They project him on Waterfall made out of smoke). Also all new dialoge has been added to the attraction. And the battle score from the movie has been added too. The new storyline is that Balbossa and his crew are after Jack Sparrow who as dissapered in the Spanish town. They believe that Jack knows the secret location of the towns treasure. Well Jack does...but first he needs to track down the key to the vault that holds the treasure. The Ride was a 10 before.. But now its off the scale.... Disney has taken the ride to whole new level... The battle sceen bettween the Pirate Ship and the Fort, has been taken to a whole new level. Larger cannon blasts, smoke coming out of the cannon's, and an action score. Get your ass to Disney this summer and see it for your self!!!
http://www.youtube.com/user/DarthEvilDead -
now get hold of some clips of superman returns..
-
Long after you cynical fucks are dead this movie will be hailed as the classic it is. I don't know what more you could possibly ask for in a sequel. They brought in the East India Trading Company, they brought in the cannibal tribe that was just mentioned off handedly in the first film. That commadore guy from the first film is now a rum drinking BADASS looking for revenge, and it's got god damend Cthulhu. People say they were either bored or there was "too much action," which makes no fucking sense. Do you need your action scenes interspersed at certain intervals? I don't think you know what your talking about and are just looking to bitch. I think they greatest thing about these pirate movies are they characters, and thats what we get more of in this one. More of these interesting characters in interesting situations. If you can honestly look at this and say this is a bad movie and then still go watch star wars or whatever, then I think maybe you should retire from the movie watching business. Your getting too old and jaded for it.
-
Dead Man's Chest bored the hell out of me - very unimpressive. **YAWN** Save your money and Netflix when it hits DVD (for the holiday season of course).
-
Seriously, it wasn't as fresh as the original but somehow more creative. It was pure fun.
-
Did anyone notice when Tia Dalma released Jack the Monkey from it's cage it ran to the other room and sat down on a pair of boots and seem to be looking at the person wearing them...Barbossa? Also Terry_1978, Will was straight with Jack when he told him he needed the compass to free Elizabeth, the only time he may have been duplicitous was when he didn't tell Jack he met his father and given the situtation Jack left him and how they met up again you can't really blame him.
-
This movie just basically made me squirm to see the next one. I can't wait to see what happens at the end of "de eart."
-
Scratches head... Well good job man.. You mean the first Pirates that came out of left field..with Jonny Depp playing such a original character that the producers thought he was nuts...And he was nominated for a Acadamy Award...Was more fresh?
Well Duh...You already seen the first one..And found out who Sparrow is..so ofcourse its not going to be as fresh. -
Jul 08, 2006 2:38:17 PM CDT
This talkback certainly isn't as fresh as the original!
by nate champion
This talkback should be for the orignal Dead Man's Chest talkback, not for the movie itself. Besides, that talkback is at least as entertaining as the film.
-
WHY THE FUCK ARE YOU READING THIS THEN? THIS IF FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE SEEN THE MOVIE DUMBASS, GO SEE IT THEN COME BACK MOTO. and yeah next summers gonna kick ass, spidey 3 pirates 3 shrek 3 transformers etc etc
-
Thats right I said it. You can have V, but ill take Jack Sparrow any day of the week. Too many great scenes to name right now, but my favorite is the introduction of Jack fout of the floating coffin. I didnt think they could top Jacks introduction from the first film, but when he blast out of that coffin I nearly leaped out of my seat in joy. God bless Johnny Depp and the makers of these films. They actually make my life better. Sad isnt it? Oh Bugga!
-
thanks for posting that without a spoiler tag you ignorant fuck. Why don't you go let your horse fuck you in your ass now you shit eating testicle wart.
-
Even though it was shorter, I thought the first one dragged while DMC managed to keep me entertained through out the entire film. Just think what Superman could have done if Singer decided to make it, you know, fun to watch.
-
C'mon, it topped the first Pirates flick - better action, storyline, barnacle men, the Kraken (didn't look like the one from Clash of the Titans though), more Captain Jack capers - excellent!
-
I really enjoy the movie, there was more action sequences and more dead bodies than in the first one. Special effects are better and the caracters have more guts in them. the script is great, heck 1 000 000 times better than other trilogies. (matrix, SW episode 1, 2 and 3)
worth my 15$ movie ticket!! -
It was marginally entertaining and Depp was good, but it was way too long and pretty forgettable overall. It is times like these that I have to remind myself that the average IQ is 100. Then everything makes sense.
-
Hi Ozy. Will was duplicitious, in that he didn't tell Jack that the compass was for the East India Trading Company - because Jack FOR SURE wouldn't have given him the thing if he knew that. So yeah, pretty much every character lied/left out some facts, which does make for some interesting conversation - and makes us identify with it, because I think we all do that in real life. So you've got just enough real mixed in with your 'over-the-top' and it's perfect! By far my favorite scene was the cannibal island scene - who give a flying fuck if it has nothing to do with the plot? It was insanely fun. AND did anyone notice the necklace next to the ring that Jack steals in Tia Dalma's house? It had a heart pendant on it that looked just like Davey Jones' music box!!! I wonder if Tia's the woman he loves??? I can't WAIT for the 3rd installment!!!!!!!!! It's gonna be a looooong year.....
-
I would be shocked if it isn't the witch chick. You know, the one from AFTER THE SUNET and 28 DAYS LATER.
-
Witch doctor bayou girl was Jones' true love, who has been keeping herself alive all these years with her hoodoo witchcraftery, but if it is the case, why she's putting them all through this rigamaroll remains to be seen in the final chapter.
-
This movie had some mighty big shoes to fill. It didn't just fill them. It busted out the seams and went stomping through the jungle barefoot, smiting everything in its path. One of the most entertaining things I have ever seen. I'm gonna steal a quote from a Superman Review I read last weekend. "If this doesn't work for you, I can't imagine what would."
-
Harry pretty much gives everone a spoiler heads up in the first paragraph, so please feel free to re-read the original article before you run around bashing people for talking about the film.
-
I agree. It was just what I wanted, as well. I'm a serious film viewer, and not a geek about a lot. I'm no mindless American popcorn flick viewer who rents whatever's in the new release section as long as it features the current A-list actors. Instead, I'm one who appreciates detailed film craftsmanship such as work done by Bergman, Kurosawa, Hitchcock, Wilder, Murnau, etc. But sometimes I just want a romp through the jungle barefoot. What I wanted from this film most of all was a roller-coaster thrill, and that's what I got. So what if it didn't take the time to give a nod to all the finer points of film-making - that would have been a detour from its goal. I'm glad it stayed on track.
-
i dont get it. so does elizabeth love sparrow also or did she switch feelings for sparrow? all of a sudden she just starts falling for sparrow or sumthing. at the end she gave him a big wet one as iff she was in love with him. someone please clarify it for me.
-
GEENA DAVIS making a triumphant return as the legendary Morgan Adams!!!!
-
But I figured this movie wouldnt sell out every showing for the day yesterday. Every showing for the night at every theater around me yesterday was sold out at 5PM. EVERY SHOWING. I knew this film had some fans, but for fucks sake, thats nuts.
-
$56 million it raked in yesterday was from people who were dumbfounded by the popularity of the first one and went back to see if they could figure out what all the fuss was. Theres a large percentage of people, even here at AICN, including me, that are in that category. I'll go see it Monday, after the crowd dies down a bit, but if its as redundant as the first, I'm not gonna like it.
-
must have had their expectations entirely out of check. I do think it'll play even better as part of an entire trillogy. They really had more payoffs from the first movie than I expected... as for people asking how barbossa is alive, it's pretty obvious that if can help bring jack and the pearl back from being eaten by the kraken, he already has been there.
-
Yup, it's bigger than Star Wars
-
That's one weird typo there. br=et? WTF?
-
You have such fascinating misspellings, I almost think that screen and orgasm should be spelled the way you've presented them. Not ripping on you, no big deal, just busting balls. BTW, I will be down in O-Town soon to see the ride for myself. Sounds pretty cool.
-
I just came from seeing it. I liked it. if you like pirates this is the movie for you. Don't know how to compare it to the first though. I like them both the same? hmm...actually i think i like this one better, because there's no slow setup like the first one. it just gets going right from the start. seeing Jack Sparrow again is like seeing an old friend. Depp plays him exactly the same. i mean he even looks exactly the same. its like time hasn't moved. a great classic character.
The little surprise ending. I thought it was gonna be Keith Richards. Since I heard he plays Sparrow's father in the 3rd film. but it was another surprise that made no sense. didn't that guy die in the first film? still, made for a cooling cliffhanger. Anyway, i like the look of this movie. it's more at sea than ever. i especially like where that voodoo lady lives. like a bayou i guess? its gotta cool feel. like the level of a video game or something. maybe rpg, hehe.
i didn't know the fat bald guy and one eyed guy returned. that was a surprise. they're part of jack's crew now? there were other people from the first film i didn't expect to see either. you'll have to see for yourself though. It was nice seeing Keira of course. i just can't stand the way she talks. her accent. i dunno why and i wish she dressed more sexy. give us something. throw us a freaky bone. although seeing her all filthy was kinda hot. Orlando as will is well. orlando bloom playing every character he plays in every movie. but he's always likeable.
Special effects now have reached a point where they look so real. that you almost don't even notice them. you just accept it as being there. i mean its so perfected. the villians in the movie are an amazing flawless effect. that has to be seen to be appreciated. especially Davy jones and his octopus face. check out when its raining and the detail of his face getting rained on. that combined with the matching lighting of each scene. it's just brilliant. they should get nominated for best visual effects come Oscar.
So yeah, can't wait to see what happens next. -
I'm pretty sure Jack was just "collected" by the Kraken, and not killed/eaten...Jones' could have just iced his ass during their scene together, but he didn't...he wants to collect on his end of the deal...He might have a nasty "lifelong" fate in mind for Sparrow, but I'm pretty sure he isn't fish food. I will be paying attention to the Tia Dalma scence a little more when I take my g/f to see it during the week ( I love opening day, she prefers the lesser post-opening crowds), which might help me get through the first half a bit better. I was actually expecting Keith Richards to come down the stairs at the end there, but Barbossa was a pretty cool move, nonetheless.
-
because of what he stands for. Her attraction to Jack is simply the temptation of giving into to her own selfishness. In essense, to become like Jack. After all, he is all about saving his own skin. I don't think Jack did anything particularly heroic at the end of this film other than recognize he was toast and his time cheating death was done. If he was a truly a hero (the way Will actually is, selfless), he would have not need be lured and then chained to the mast by Elisabeth. Jack is only half a hero, and that's all he's ever been. Elisabeth, however, realises she has tainted her own soul by damning him, which is by far the most interesting part of this film's cliffhanger.
-
..I think Tia D. being Jones' lost love makes sense....I vaguely rememeber something else about the ring Jack stole from her, (like...why?) and its resemblace to things in the chest when Jack opened it....you know, this movie just got a little bit better, now that I know I missed a few things here and there.
-
had a locket that matched that of Davey Jones. She at the very least knows who the woman in question is. This is why I think Jones is a Vader template (redeemable villain). He is bitter, but gave it all up because he wanted to save a woman. Suggesting to me that his trade gave her life, since that is the trade he offers the dying sailors, sort of a mockery of his own sacrifice.
-
repeated viewing. I love stuff like this.
-
Was so glad I bought movie tix ahead of time...whew! I'd say do so all weekend!
This movie kicked ass overall. There were a few times my mind wondered... how and when will they wrap this up? But in the end I was completey happy with it. Seeing Barbosa with the apple surprised the shit out of me and the audiance let out collective cheers and claps. Gotta love opening night! I say the climax of the film made up for any time lagging throught the movie. They could have cut 10-15mins off imo, but when I left the theater I honestly did not realize it had been close to a 2 1/2 hr film.
Also,loved that they played into the chem between Jack/Elizabeth. Looking forward to see if that leads anywhere in POTC 3. -
Gonna be semi-interesting to see how the cynical fanboys dismiss those results.
-
It's safe to say SR got blown away...
-
Hell man. ROTS made $50 million with 3600 theaters, Pirates 2 made $55 with 4100 theaters. Those 500 theaters are worth about $5 million extra, thus matching Pirates 2 opening day. And let's not forget that ROTS opened on a thursday in may when kids are still in school. Both records are incredible feats.
-
....what an overcooked, charmless waste. I'll skip part 3 thank you.
-
I have heard that Richard's may play Jack's dad in POTC3. the last I read was a qoute from Jonny saying that "things were looking good". Nothing set in stone I guess.
-
The movie's a hoot. Some really great lines "Now where's that dog with the keys" was my faveorite.
-
Do you know much about Davey Jones?... No... Uh, yes it's going to save Elizabeth...
-
but then i realized that really wouldnt register too well with the common audience member...like that fat bitch that kept kickin my seat...i'll summon the kraken on her ass...
-
Jack Sparrow on Keith Richards. Now it has morphed into a joke to give the man a cameo to imply he may or may not be Jack's father.
-
Very much similar to the Indy Jones trilogy in that respect. One of the more hilarious parts is the scene during the three way swordfight towards the end, where the dude with the glass eye basically recaps all of the subplots for his friend, as if to tell the audience that we know this shit is getting confusing, so let us keep you in the loop.
-
I bet there's a bunch of suvivors living down there ala Pinochio (sp?) and Keith Richards/Jack's dad is down there.
-
save everyone, but in selling out Jack the way she did realised she moved closer to becoming like him. Jack, however, seems to be infatuated with Elisabeth insomuch as he can love anyone but himself. So I think the 3rd film will be about how far Jack is really willing to go for love. Will is going to have a problem trusting her after that eyefull he got, and I'm sure it will be one of those things where there is confusion because they don't talk to each other and Will is too noble and will do what is right instead of trying to "win" Elisabeth.
-
..;but knew all about this from the relentless ads on Disney channel and Nickelodeon. Ads made it seem a lot of fun, which it was, and made it seem more kid-friendly than it actually was. Bit long and cliffhanger disappointed some. Dialogue often hard to understand. Heard many parents explaining to kids that jack wasn't dead. And heard a couple kids caution parents not to leave because there was a "surprise" at the end. marketing, marketing, marketing. On top of good filmmaking. My kids, who loved the first superman when they saw it years ago on TV, simply do not want to see that movie, because they hated the ads.
-
...well he would...
-
alot like empire strikes back ...but a bit long though .....
-
I still loved the hell out of the film. Can't wait for Part III.
-
in the beginning of the film because he was pulled between Elisabeth and his pirate 'freedom'. His mind was still on Elisabeth from the previous adventures. He just didn't know it until he saw her again. Notice his compass started working again when he was with her? It pointed to her, or to whatever SHE wanted, because for the first time in his life, Jack is considering someone else's needs before his own. It's why Jack accepts his fate at the end of the film - she's got him figured out. Anyway, that is the whole arc for Jack and it will be resolved in the 3rd flim. Does he want his 'freedom', or to be tamed by a woman? I doubt he will chose to be tamed, but he will probably do something sacrificially noble out of his love for Elisabeth.
-
She is struggling between doing what is right and Jack's notion of freedom. That's why she looks all mopey and is standing in the rain on her wedding day, staring out at the ocean when the film opens. Anyway, she doesn't really deserve someone like Will, and that is what is kind of interesting. She wants independence but is confined by the position of women (a modern women in her time, blah, blah, blah), while Will is traditional. It will be interesting to see how Will changes in the 3rd film, but I suspect he will do whatever it takes to free his father, even betray Elisabeth.
-
two different kind of movies. Besides who the hell cares, we the viewers are the ones who benefit if we liked the films. If you didn't like superman returns for whatever reason get the fuck over it already. It wasn't a bad film if it didnt achieve your unrealistic expectations
-
Unfortunately, Dead Man's Chest is more comparable to Matrix Reloaded rather than Empire Strikes Back. It was all over the place and didn't even bother with trying to make sense. I won't be watching this one again.
-
The curse of the aztec gold is still in effect. Why else would the monkey be undead? How else would Barbosa still be alive?
Can someone help me remember why Jack didn't want to kill the heart? -
...AND it's whooping Superman's ass.
This is fantastic. -
Jack, with the Black Spot on him, was deathly afraid of the Kraken which would hunt the one with the black spot ceaselessly. If he destroyed the heart and killed Davy Jones then there'd be nobody to call off the Kraken. He certainly wanted Davy dead but first he had to use the heart to negotiate and get Davy to remove the black spot.
-
thanks buddy
-
A lot of talking in this movie to setup the plot. Action came second. which i guess was fine. but a lot of people i know hated it. said it was boring. I ignored all the ads, making of specials, etc. I wasn't that excited to see this movie actually. So i had no idea what to expect. like i said earlier. its a solid good, but not great. there's no big wow moment in this film. it seems like a real good episode of a pirates TV show. if they had one.
-
The monkey is the victim of Aztec Gold Curse V2. At the end of the first movie, after the credits, we see the monkey trot past Barbosa's corpse and climb up onto the chest. He grabs a coin and then leaps at the camera with a skeleton face. The monkey is the only one with that particular curse now. Barbosa should be dead, at yet he's walking around eating green apples. I assume the voodoo priestes brought him back, and that is definitely a good thing.
-
not the heart in the chest. What if it's the heart shaped music box? That's the real heart that controls him somehow. Also, we saw that same heart shape at the voodoo ladies hut. I wonder if she is the love of Davy Jones. Hrmmmm.
-
"The curse of the aztec gold is still in effect. Why else would the monkey be undead? How else would Barbosa still be alive? Can someone help me remember why Jack didn't want to kill the heart?"
for the monkey look at the end of the credits of the first one.
For barbossa, Tia Dalma ressurrected him. When jack went to her and got the jar of dirt the one guy (maybe gibbs, i forget) looks in the back and sees two feet from what we think is a dead body. At the end the same feet are seen walking down the steps turning out to be barbossa. -
After the credits in the original movie we see the monkey take back one of the pieces of Aztec gold so that's why he's still undead. As for why Jack didn't want to kill the heart, well it was the Kracken that had been sent to get him- Jack wanted Davy Jones' heart so Jones would be forced to let him go or else Jack'll kill him.
-
I loved this movie! It was two and a half hours of unrelenting fun!
The only thing I didn't like at first was what happened to Norrington since the first film. I liked his character in the first one. Even though he was a major antagonist throughout most of the movie in the end he turned out to be a really good man. Then in this movie he shows up as sort of an angry drunken joke. That bothered me at first because I worried this movie would completely ignore his character from the first one and make him a complete asshole in this one. But then near the end he sort of redeems himself by saving everyone else. Sure, he only did it to further his own agenda, but he still took off to face the fish guys by himself, risking his own life to save everyone else, including Jack.
And my favorite scene in this one was where the three guys start fighting on the beach and Elizabeth just gets mad at them and throws a temper tantrum. When I heard she was going to be fighting more I was worried that this would be one of those terrible sequels where all of a sudden the characters from the first movie all have powers and abilities they didn't have in the first one (Mummy Returns) and Elizabeth is suddenly a ninja for no reason. But instead when everyone starts fighting, instead of getting involved she just throws a tantrum until she gets tired and sits down to pout. -
And far more elequently too... Oh well.
-
For all the great things on show here, cinematogrpahy, production design, the locations, Rush's return as Barbarossa and of course bill nighy as the slimy Davy jones and tom holland as the wicked lord becekett. There are periods in this movie that were just flat. Depp although very watchable wasnt given enough material to be as witty as he was the last time. in other words at certain points you could hear the movie coming apart as verbinksi ready specatacular set piece after spectacular set piece to stop his film from capsizing altogether. this film was the equivalent of a very lavish meal. Just when you cant eat any more. they give you more. The story for those how havent seen(look away now) it. is this. We begin the movie with ill-fated Turner Swann Wedding. Will turner and his bride to be Elizabeth (The beautiful Knightly) have been arrested by the vile lord beckett for lettting Sparrow(depp) go free. Beckett wants something in return. That something is davey jones locker plus Sparrows Compass and in that box is the heart of the most foul pirate of them all. Who gets that box controls the sea. The only one who knows where the key to Davy jones locker is is Sparrow. Weatherby Turner(jonathon Pryce) talks beckett into a deal. you see both Turner and Swann wil both be hanged. Will turner convinces beckett that he will go and get the compass off jack and beckett agrees to this request. Sparrow has been haunted by the image of Will Turners dad, bootstrap bill(stellan Skarsgarrd) who is a slave of Davey Jones. Sparrow and turner meet up. But there is a problem, Davy jones locker needs a key and there is only one person who has this. davy jones himself. Turner says he will get on to the flying dutchman and get the key and this is where he comes face to face with his old man. This film is nearly three hours long and i missed the final of DR who. At times ted elliot and terry Russio loose the run of there screenplay. Verbsinki seems at times to be all at sea. the romantic subplot between Knightley and bloom is utterly non existent. Skarsgards is given nothing. Depp has some witty one or two liners, but even the great depp is flat. even flatter is bloom, who is ccardboard cut out. knightley is knightley. the real star of the show is Nighy. The film looks spectacular and Jones creature-hench are outstanding. this is one film that should have been given a trim. and maybe even a new cast. this film suffers from too many characters. I am giving this film and this is tough 3.5/5
-
She will remind Davey Jones of his lost love and will, who's destined for greatness, will kill Jones, probably with the help of Depp. The witch doctor is NOT Davey's exgirl. Elizabeth is the loover reincarnated. Just you watch.
-
...Entertainment Weekly told me so. They said POTC III would delve more into his backstory...
-
cause I found Davey's backstory to be a confusing throwaway plot to a very well-acted and slightly underused villain. I said this in the other talkback, but I cant wait to see Jones, Sparrow, and Barbossa in the same scene together; it will be one for the greats.
-
... then you CAN'T have fun at movies. Seriously, this thing is like 2 1/2 hours of nonstop fun. I smiled from start to finish.
-
Way too long and rediculous.
-
Don't be surprised if this movie does $127 - 145 million dollars by sunday.
-
He is cursed, between the Devil and the deep blue sea. He cut out his own heart because it caused him too much pain, brought on by a woman, who he loved but could not have.
-
They should add an intermission for these long ass summer blockbusters, damn!It wasn't bad but yeesh. Iwas fucking exhausted after.
-
instances where the sea goddess needs a human body to inhabit or something like that and it will be Elisabeth.
-
This movie was AWESOME! I've seen it twice since Thursday night @ midnight! I can't wait to see it again. Non-stop fun, and when I talk with others about all of the "What will happen next?" questions -- well you can talk for hours. Box Office Mojo is reporting POTC2 had est. single opening day of $55,500,000!! Don't worry, Panterarocks -- you probably won't be able to get a ticket anyway, you scurvy scallywag!! I showed up for a 2:45PM performance @ 2:00 PM today and it was already sold out; so I had to go to the next showing just to get a seat. This movie is awesome.
-
Of course, he wasnt cursed until AFTER he cut out his heart. I guess next time I feel like committing suicide I should just go ahead and do it since I'll become some kind of all-powerful sushi face when i do it.
-
That would mean Will "destined for greatness" Turner will be possessed by...Lord Nelson?
-
I thought this was even better than the first. i hope the next is as good, if not better.
-
First?
-
I don't think she was actually falling for Jack at all. I think the tricky way in which they used the compass was meant to make us think that, so we would feel the shock of betrayal when she kissed Jack, but I thought her actions afterward made it immediately clear that she was doing it just to save her own skin. She played to his attraction to get him where she wanted him, pure and simple. Quite ruthless of her, if you ask me. I think Jack was impressed. (Pissed, but impressed!)
-
Okay, how did THAT happen?
-
It's so nice to see a totally kickass sequel that's not a prequel or a reboot or some strange hybrid reimagining. (Yeah, I'm looking at you "Superman Returns.")
-
You're one funny bastard. Keep up the good work.
-
I guess I need a movie to have a plot that makes sense, the action to serve the plot (not the other way around), strong characterization, non-juvenile humour, and scenes that actually contribute to the plot. Hell, Pirates 1 was a 10/10 movie for me. This one maybe scores a 4/10.
-
THAT MOVIE WAS WONDERFUL!!! I haven't had that much fun in a movie in a very long time. MUCH better than watching Brandon "I did Pilates to look like Superman" Routh. Captain Jack Sparrow has more impact in the five seconds he stared down the maw of the Kraken than Superdeadbeatdad had in his entire movie. I loved that movie, I will pay to see it again, and I don't care if you haters sit in your parents' basement and lambast it for eternity. The numbers will tell all folks, and $55 mil the first day tells a WHOLE lot. I now return you to your regularly scheduled nitpicking while I go have fun AGAIN. Thanks those who pointed out the locket and Barbossas' feet.
-
Wow, the producers and writers followed the normal Hollywood sequel structure on POTC: Dead Man's Chest- make the second one bigger, louder, longer and about half as good.
The cast returns and they all do adroit work in this painfully convoluted follow-up to 2003's super-fun swashbuckler. Depp's blown up his Captain Sparrow to bigger and goofier proportions. Knightley's the same and Orlando Bloom, as always, is horribly miscast. The two knucklehead pirate version of R2-D2/C3PO return too - they're even more slapsticky than the first film. Bill Nighy chews scenes nicely as Davey Jones, a villain sporting a squid for a head. Jack Davenport, playing a down-on-his-luck returnee from the first film pretty much steals every moment he's on the screen.
The cast does a serviceable job with a script so muddled and twisted with blandness that it makes a recent Star Wars film almost look good. Okay, the script's not that bad but it seems to be a hodge-podge of ideas tossed into a blender with very little regard for cohesion, dramatic tension, build-up, etc. After 2.5 wandering hours the film's script ends suddenly, leaving the audience with nothing approaching a climax. If you dug the way the Lord of the Rings films ended without any crescendo, then Dead Man's Chest may work for you.
Additionally, the script's dialogue seems to have gone through a boredom machine. Gone are funny quips and quotable lines of the first film. Instead we're left with nonsense lines and almost zero jokes. Add in the writers' sudden desire to make the characters behave in illogical ways and you're left wondering why you've sat through 15 minutes of the film, let alone 2.5 hours of it.
As for the action, most of it's screwed over by poor editing and really, really bad CGI involving a giant sea-monster, the Kraken. Never looking remotely real or possessing any semblance of real space, the CGI monster sucks up a good 25 minutes of over-blown, loud, pointless, un-exciting action sequences. Look the fake the monster's ripping apart a fake ship while CGI people get flung about! Sigh. The CGI crew of Davey Jones -
Yeah, Im in the same boat you are--its about an average movie with a huuuge amount of filler, little character interaction, and a weak main villain (in terms of characterization), to say nothing of the slew of cliches and obvious telegraphs. That said, the movie is only the first half of a two part sequel (which was my main problem with matrix) and its pretty interesting in its own right. Yeah, all Depp did was run from fights and NEVER kicked ass, but the entire orlando plot was really good, to say nothing of a nice cliffhanger. Its good summer faire. I liked it.
-
The movie is great. But, I must say, I feel dispair, as to me the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise was the last hope. And now all hope is gone. I'll explain. The big studios are no longer hiring and employing people with original ideas, so every year what we get are re-hashes, remakes, or the new trend, what I call "secret remakes". "Secret remakes" are movies that are remakes of other movies but shhhhhhh, they don't want us to know about it(examples from this year- The Bench Warmers is a remake of Revenge of the Nerds, RV is a remake of National Lampoon's Vacation, and the upcoming Accepted ia a remake of Old School, which is strange and rather desperate as Old School is only like three years old , but shhhhhhh, we are not supposed to know they are remakes, remember, oh... okay, sorry) Now, every year or so, one original idea or concept slips through the cracks, and it turns out to be great and brings a breath of fresh air to a stinky mess. To me, the original Pirates was just that, an original fresh breath, and I thought the sequels would continue the trend. But, all that is gone now. Dead Man's Chest is a re-hash of scenes, concepts, plot points, lines, etc, from The Good, The Bad and The Ugly, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, Crocodile Dundee, Empire Strikes Back, Return of the Jedi, the original Pirates of the Caribeean:The Curse of the Black Pearl, and 20,000 Thousand Leagues Under the Sea. It's like they took all those things, a little from this one, a little from this other one, and threw it all together in a blender and whatever was formed, that's the movie they made. I swear, they were not even subtle with the details of all those films. They just made each element they took exactly as it was in those movies mentioned! Dead Man's Chest is a great film, and it will make a gazillion dollars, absolutely no doubt. But original it ain't.
-
But the story is not convoluted or hard to follow. I really don't get that criticism.
-
He was being chased by the Kraken to be put into service on Davy Jones's crew. He was also adrift at the beginning of the film. At the end, he stops running.
-
I was not impressed with the Kraken, but rather, with the woefully underused Davey Jones. Yeah, his background was very weak, but neighy really brought a lot of quirks and screen presence to the character.
-
I don't mind him running, but he doesnt do anything BUT run. And since he's supposed to be the main star of this one, as opposed to the supporting role of the first, the entire movie's theme is run, run, run and very little fighting/dueling. Again, unless I'm very much mistaken, when you watch 2 and 3 together you'll notice a really good 3 hour film with about 2 hours of filler, with all of the cool stuff reeeaaallly stretched out.
-
I missed that fact
-
yeah, it's crime to have unrealistic expectations for a movie with a 260+ million dollar budget.
-
just the main villain's entire purpose and background. In Dead Man's Chest, Davey Jones is basically one giant mcguffin. Other than saying bargain struck and summoning the kraken, Davey Jones does nothing. Heck, we arent even shown how the bargains work, where the kraken comes from, or anything else for that matter; we're just told they exist and are shown the results. All in all, it makes for a thin a very thin plot that's obviously been stretched out. And I'm a huuuge fan of the first one. Also, just so you know, I maintain that for an opening sequence/1st act, this story works so far. This is not, however a standalone movie with a beginning, middle, and an end. Its just one long beginning and part of a second act. So far so good, though, but i wish I didnt have to pay 10 bucks to see half a movie, no matter how long it is.
-
that Elizabeth will turn out to intensely remind Davey Jones about his old fling. That's right, boys and girls, expect more longing and love triangles in which a bunch of pirates semi-honorably fight one another for a toothpick with blonde hair. And I still stand by my belief that Keira Knightly will turn out to be the reincarnation/possessee of the sea goddess.
-
of Pirates 3, here you go. Be warned, however, that you'll find only sorrow. Remember, I warned you.
-
ummm...if you didnt really didnt find the 1st movie that memorable, you're almost certainly going to forget this one. Yes, the effects are very, very good, but there is less story in this movie than is in the first (and its not like the first one was very heavy on plot, either). There is less humor in this one, more ation filler, a bit less logic, and the 3 main characters dont really interact with one another. Still, for a summer movie, its worth your movie ticket, I can assure you. If I had to give it a letter grade, I'd give it a b-. Now, from your point of view, if you gave the 1st movie a C grade, you'd probably give this one either the same grade or less. Let me put it to you this way, the first movie seemed like a good disney story with some bruckheimer action thrown in to spice things up. Bruckheimer's influence seems to be a bit heavier in this film. If you're a fan of the rock/con-air type action movies, then you'll probably be a bigger fan of this film than the previous one. Not that I'm bad mouthing those films because they have their audience, too--i'm just trying to give you an idea of the direction and plotting. On a plus side, Davey Jones is deffinitely worth the price of your admission; he's a very well-played character. Everything else...ehhh, more of the same (maybe a bit less).
-
Except this one has no character setups and few first meetings. Almost every character here is established. so the movie moves along at a steady pace. But this movie barely takes place on land. This movies about pirate ships. yeah a few land scenes here and there and one big action set on island involving kind of a super monkey ball thing. you'll understand when you see it lol. but for the most part. lots a water and rum in this movie.
-
I never understand why some people hate a decent movie so much that they knash their teeth in godawful complaining. POTC was decent, a lot of fun for some, boring for others....but some of you here treat it as the second coming of ALONE IN THE DARK...Get a grip! Some poster above screamed for a whole paragraph about the lack of any swordfights whatsoever. Guess he slept through the 6 min. long swordfight near the end.
My wife and I saw it this afternoon. She thought it too long...got a little bored...and yeah it could have had a better editing job to tighten it. I liked the first one better, but I still enjoyed this one. In comparison, we both liked SR better. Seems like SR was about as long of a movie, but it flew by compared to POTC. But is still gets a thumbs up from me. -
strangely enough for a pirate movie, although there are more than a few scenes aboard various ships, there is only 1 ship-to-ship battle and it only lasts 3 or 4 minutes tops. Whats even more odd is that all the characters seem to do most of their traveling in row boats in the middle of the caribbean--not ships. I had suspected this film was a bit stingy on its ship battles because it was only the first act, and after reading the script review, it looks like I was right. All of the ship battles will take place in the third movie, as well as characterization, and a climax. Thats really the main complaint I have with Pirates 2: its just a 1st act thats been dragged out to 2.5 hours. There is no real climax to the film, Davey Jones is almost a complete mystery, and all the characters stand around (or run) and do nothing until the last fifteen minutes.
-
after it pointed to jack I was like OMG but then I realized they stayed in the same diagonal path so it was just pointing to the chest.
-
the three were relegated to the background while keira mugged for the camera and argued with R2D2 and C3PO for the first third of the fight, the second third was the three running through the gungle and whacking the swords at each other with NO choreography, and the final third was all three of them running on top of and inside of a hampster wheel--without any real sword play. You could tell all of that was without any choreography and just made up at the last second as they went along. Again, anybody who can't tell that this movie was an hour long first act that had been stretched to 2.5 hours is seriously smoking something. Is it still a good movie? FOr what it is, sure. Its fun, it kills time, and you get a few laughs, exactly what a summer faire is all about.
-
you proved our point. the only sword fight you could think of was a six minute fight at the end, badly choreographed and slapped together though it was. In the original movie, you had a duel between orlando and bloom, bloom and two pirates, and depp and rush at the climax. Here, what have you got? That's right, the black pearl versus sushi.
-
with all the extras. In this new film, you still only have a handful of extras duke it out with our heros at the last thirty minutes (at the exact same time our beloved Sparrow runs yet again in a hampster wheel). The reason we all say its light on the plot is because it IS LIGHT ON THE PLOT and has a lot of filler. 45 minute island cannibal sequence--filler. 15 minute keira ghost dress/stowaway sequence-filler. And every single character pulls a backstab/twist at least once. The first time or two it was kind of cool and humorous. After the dozen times it happens, it gets kind of monotonous and lazy.
-
http://www.jacksparrow.jp/archives/potc3/p3teaser06707.php
-
I'm not a big fan of the rating thing. I found it more entertaining that Superman. How is that? All I can say is I keep thinking about it and want to know what happens, so it captured my imagination in that respect. I think that at first view, it seems like it's kind of a jumble, but on reflection, it is laying a lot of groundwork for where all of the characters are going in the next film, and that seems primarily the purpose of it. There is a lot of unfinished business, so it seems like there is no resolution and it ends abruptly when they could've cut out a lot of stuff and given it at least a proper ending. Davy Jones is wonderful. I love the character already. There are hardly any naval scuttles, as was mentioned. There is alot of going to and fro (like a treasure hunt) and talking. However, that kind of thing doesn't bother me as long as I feel the characters are going somewhere internally. So, you are warned - I will cut a film a lot of slack if I like what is going on with the characterization. And that is definitely the case here.
-
The ghost dress scene shows that Elisabeth is clever, sets it up for the same ship to get attacked later with Will on it to get details from the crew, sets it up for Jones to find the wedding dress floating in the water, and provides exposition about the problems the East India Trading Company is facing in the Carribean waters. I would say that it was not useless by a long shot.
-
scene went on WAY too long, as did the hamster wheel (although, it was cute at first. There was fight choreography all throughout the deserted fort! Go watch the film again, hahaha.
-
you can always wait on seeing pirates 2 until just before the release of the 3rd. in fact, you will probably like the second one a lot more as a result. Its your call. In either case, its completely worth your time and pretty enjoyable, so long as you like the characters. And Davy Jones completely rules!
-
worth watching to me - the naval battles. Same type of thing played well in Star Trek, too.
-
WHEN HARRY FUCKING TELLS IN IN THE OPENING FUCKING PARAGRAPH THAT THIS IS A THREAD FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE SEEN THE MOVIE TO DISCUSS, AND THAT THERE WILL BE *******SPOILERS******** AND THAT IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THE MOVIE, NOT TO BE IN HERE. IF YOU CAME IN HERE AND HAD SOMETHING SPOILED, BLAME FOR OWN RETARDED FUCKING SELVES FOR YOUR LACK OF READING COMPREHENSION. IDIOTS.
-
just like the first one. I love the wheel sequence and Davy Jones pirates. The sequence with the guy coming out of the wall to talk was great. Great effects, great fun. But...this is the very definition of a fun, summer popcorn movie with flashes of depth occasionally, but mostly just yelling and noise. The Indiana Jones reference couldn't have been more obvious. And as soon as the dog ran away, I said to my friend, "10 bucks says the post-credit sequence is the dog." I called it! And despite the apt Star Wars comparisons, I really like MacKenzie Crook and the other guy. More Rosencrantz and Guildenstern than C3PO and R2D2 to me. Anyway, hate me all you want, but I still think Superman Returns is a better overall film for its emotional impact and strong ideas. But Pirates is still better than should be expected for a film based on a Disney ride.
-
This film was long and had too much dialogue- but at least it had lots of fun and action. SR lacked in the latter & thats why its getting its assed kicked at the box office
-
That made me laugh. It's so true. Those characters are used as the comic relief. like the brownies in Willow. What's weird is, at one point they're gonna kill Elizabeth for the chest. then later on they're all hangin out like friends. you can't trust let alone turn your back on these bleeding pirates
-
Some retarded ben stiller movie. where he plays a night watchmen of a natural history museum. that comes to life after midnight or something. the movies full of fossils, like dick van dyke and mickey rooney lol. this is ben stillers haunted mansion, ala eddie murphy style.
-
It would appear that the third movie would have to involve an all out war on the ocean between the West Indian Company, the coast guards, and the different legions of pirates.
-
Nuff said, lol. Nah, but i still like supes returns and this pirate thing. they were good. this was a fair summer.
-
is what it looked like to me. I don't know, it looks fun. Great concept.
-
goes naval on ya. I still haven't seen MI:III. Tom Cruise and preening, giant teeth bother me. Is it really that good?
-
The largest single day take ever. In the third movie they should fight Rennie Harlan.
-
can you imagine it? that would be insane-o-crazy
-
Yes, it really is that good. MI3 was my favorite movie of the year until this one.
-
pirates still did better per theater by over 200 grand. face it. star wars just got it's balls handed to it on a silver millenium falcon. this movie was good. not fantastic like the first. but still extrememly good. better than supes definetly. possibly the best film of the year (so far). i'm worried a bit about this year, cuz there's not that much left...bond comes out november, and that's about it. x3 was great. nacho was great also. and V was ok. but everything else i've seen this year has been kinda "meh". and you know the kind of "meh" i'm talking about.
-
calypso, the sea goddess is in the second film under another guise. the black pearl will sail upside down and a few other interesting tidbits if you need to know. from what my source says, the possible fourth film would be a prequel explaining how jack became captain jack.
-
Tia Dalma. And she's Davy's love, right?
-
Finally, a summer blockbuster worth getting excited about. It just kept going and going and going and never let up. It deserves all the box-office records it's going to get.
-
tia dalma is correct and yes, she is davy's love. hope this doesn't piss people off but you'll get over it and forget all about it once the next "great" summer blockbuster comes landing like a thud in a theater near you.
-
script review that was on Latinoreview.com. Disney had them pull it. It's possible they have changed it, no?
-
By weekend's climax, Superman Returns will only earn 21 to 22 million dollars or less at the box office...that, judging by its limp 7 million dollar take on Friday. This proves without a doubt that Superman Returns is deader than a doornail at the box office!!! Fact is, with capacity crowds attending The Pirates movie this weekend...and a number of those performances obviously sold out, Superman Returns should have gotten a significant audience spill over of those who couldn't get in to see Pirates. Well, that's always been the prevailing wisdom in Hollywood, but as we can see by the sorry example of Superman Returns, that theory has failed miserably here!!! Pirates' opening day at the box office, hauling in a take of 54 to 55 million dollars alone, took in more money than Superman Returns entire 1st weekend box office take!!! One might suspect that poor word of mouth on Superman Returns has finally put the last kryptonite nail in the coffin of Superman. That's why Warner seems to be warming to the idea of a Batman vs. Superman film...since Brian Singer has written the current Superman story line into a corner...with no place to go!!!
-
..Pirates is OK. It wasn't great, it wasn't bad. Some of you are talking like its the second coming. By the way Superman is equal to Pirates as far as quality. Pirates had more action..but at least Supes had a distinguishable plot...Pirates was way to scattershot and convoluted.
-
your post was accurate. but remember you got brandon routh v johnny depp (one char established in the past v one in the now ( and being oscar nominated) ) depps jack sparrow comin 2 years after the black pearl brings more to the table that rouths re-interpretation of superman. aka copy.
-
Only held it for 3 weeks... poor Cameron.
-
Honestly. This Superman vs. Pirates bullshit is pointless. People act like they have some sort of financial stake in these movies. I loved both Pirates and Superman. And you know who wins in a situation like that? I do. The only reason I even remotely want Superman to be successful would be the fact that I want to see more sequels to the movie, hopefully ones a little more coherent. I could care less if Pirates makes any money because I will see Pirates 3 in May regardless. Christ, you don't like Superman, don't go see it. Simple as that. You don't like Pirates, don't go see that either. Or bootleg it or something, whatever. But proclaiming your movie the champion based on these silly box office numbers is pointless. Pirates succeeded because it appealed to a broader demographic then Superman and a lack of counterprogramming this weekend. Pirates has Johnny Depp and Orlando Bloom to woo in the girls with their boyfriends who come for the action. Last week Superman had Devil Wears Prada take a decent sized chunk away from its grosses. Box office has as much to do with the competition as it does with its own quality. You didn't achieve anything important in your life for the movie that you were rooting for to make more money than the other.
-
I bet he turns out to be Jack's dad.
-
Are also the people who can't seem to spell for shit in their posts. Coincidence? Hmmm...
-
well. The story in Superman is absolutely terrible. Not to mention it is completely unfaithful to the character. Pirates, on the other hand, is a consistent portrayal (which is why it will continue to make money) with a relatively decent story. The design in Superman does not even touch the creativity of Pirates, despite pirates being uneven. So there.
-
Okay, I have to just stomp on lots of gripes right now. First, the Superman comparisons. Stupid. They're two totally different movies. Plus, the only "worthy argument" put forward is that SR had more of a plot. Um, yeah, right. Pirates 2 had about 10 plots going on, so much that 3 hours was just the set up, and all without a single loophole of fact or intelligence (and yes, I was looking for them). SR, though I liked it, had a stupid plot. Seriously, Lex AND Sup AND Clark all return to the world at the same time and nobody thinks this is unusual? Lazy writing. Plus, when is Superman ever going to grow a brain and get a megnetometer attached to his belt? Every villain he rushes to face ALWAYS has the frickin' green rock. Okay, now on to Pirates proper. First, every character had a wonderful arc, perfect for the middle act of any trilogy. Very much like Empire Strikes Back. The lack of "pirate stuff" such as naval battle is being saved for the final (third) act--didn't you see all those ships massing in Port Royal harbor? Second, Barbossa being back makes perfect sense. If Tia (the voodoo priestess) can raise not only Jack but a whole frickin' ship from the depths, why can she not raise Barbossa from the dead? Okay, now for an intermission, and then another post . . .
-
the idea that Batman Begins is as bad as Superman Returns. At least in Batman was in character. Also, Sleepy Hollow had no interesting characters. I'd call that a problem.
-
Okay, I'm back. To begin, people have complained about the length of the movie and even suggested an intermission. But we have been getting used to--and thus expecting--event movies to be 3 hours instead of 2. Lord of the Rings was longer and nobody minded. Those who find it boring are just foolishly expecting a rehash of the first film. I applaud the filmmakers for doing things differently. How horrible would Star Wars V have been if it was just "standard sequel fodder" (i.e. a rehash of the events of Star Wars IV)? Moving on, I'm glad there were less naval scenes (battles or otherwise), because by going different places, mostly in small groups (Star Trek fashion), this is expanding the genre. Pirate films have long suffered by being as formulaic as date and sports-underdog movies. Pirates 2 is showing us how much more possibility this genre really has, like Indiana Jones did. Plus, the characters being in small boats all the time, I felt, was a wonderful tribute to the ride at Disneyland which inspired it. Okay, what else? There were tons of homages to past films, such as 20000 Leagues and Indiana Jones (the missing weapon at draw-time, anyone?) and these only increased the fun. Okay, now onto the third post . . .
-
Soon to end ranting. People have complained about this movie not being made for kids. Ya know, when I was 7 I saw Raiders of the Lost Ark--about 10 times! I got pissed when movies went soft and sugar-coated. I'm glad movies (especially ones from the Mouse House) are getting their teeth back. Kids need fewer helmets and more falls to make them self-reliant, real people. Pirates 2 is a perfect balance between the dark and the fun. The actors play everything beautifully, somehow managing to not take anything seriously, but also make us believe the world they're in. Absolutely remarkable. Now, speaking of actors, we lead into the third movie. However you look at it, the Pirates trilogy is from Elizabeth Swan's point of view. Every movie opens with her. Jack Sparrow is the most popular character but not the central one. I'm looking forward to a big battle-royal between Sparrow, Will, Norrington, the East India Company, Barbossa, Davey Jones and whoever the hell else wants to get involved, with Elizabeth as the lynchpin, whether she is the reincarnated goddess or not (an interesting idea, and possible, given the film's endless teasers, such as Jack being thought of as a god, and a hero, when he was neither, and Elizabeth being his foil in every way). Trilogies operate like this: Movie 1 introduces characters. Movie 2 everything goes to hell. Movie 3 has everyone duke it out. Pirates 1 and 2 have served their purposes perfectly. I can't wait until next summer . . .
-
Kiera is not a toothpick with hair; she's a sexy tomboy beanpole. Can't people remember anything? Anyways, it is so tiring to see people compare box office numbers. I like POTC and Star Wars and Spiderman and Superman. Give it up with the dollar comparisons. Have to say a few parts got kind of boring with DMC but there was a lot that was interesting. I liked how they worked Jack the monkey into the movie, picking up on the post-credit scene from the first. Hopefully POTC3 can be a little more streamlined. Love the teaser poster for it.
-
....I think the consensus is right about Barbossa being brought back by the Vodoo chick, and also the voodoo chick being Davy Jones's lost love. Having said that I found only a couple of things i didn't like. First I thought that while it was a good thing they didnt water down Jack Sparrow at all i thought he swung too far the other direction. I felt he spent 95% of this movie being a cowardly ass that only slightly redeemed himself at the end. Second, Harry is full of shit, that scene with the dog was not worth sitting through the credits for. They should have tacked the Pirates 3 trailer on at the end, that would have been kick ass.
-
Perhaps I did. If so, I apologize.
-
Pirates, didn't Jack pretty much only do what was most self-serving? It just happened to dovetail with the other character's needs? I mean, he would help out, but it also helped himself in almost every situation.
-
Keep in mind that the dog could still be shown in the third movie. Not likely, but still possible. Nobody knew if the monkey from the end of the first would be shown in the second but he was, and in a very innovative way.
-
with your wild theories about why POTC is making more money. Gee, now it's because of a 'consistent portrayal,' whatever that means. Sorry to have to school you in 2 talkbacks, but Seanny_D got it right. Pirates appeals to a broader audience. It's a sequel to a successful film, it's got Johnny Depp and Orlando Bloom, two huge draws, and it appeals to kids, and it's non-stop action, whereas SR was a more adult film starring relative unknowns, with the exception of Spacey, who isn't a huge box office draw, that focused more on characters and ideas within an action setting. Anyone could have predicted that Pirates would be more successful. That is if anyone cares about such things. Oh wait, I forgot where I am. Of course the people here do because it's SO important to be champion! Have fun with that. Now, Scanner Darkly and Lady in the Water and my movie summer will be complete.
-
no, this was confirmed from a friend of mine who was working on a shoot i was on. he resumes his duties on world's end on the 17th of this month. as far as that script review goes, some things have been changed but not by much. bruckheimer, will you please admit what is really taking so long with the third flick. since you won't, i will. your production is on it's third special effects coordinator. lantieri to hall to frazier, 3 big fx coordinators. stunt people injured. bloom's stunt double quitting during the first initial shoot for both flicks. ships sinking. injuries. sounds like the waterworld shoot when the crew would leave for lunch on friday only to return from their lunchbreaks on monday but at least these films will see a profit. congrats on that one. dead men, tell no tales indeed.
-
I mean...first you think it's POTC...but then it's Time Bandits!!!
-
broadest audience when done right. The same audience at POTC. Singer deviated and now WB is paying for it. I'm glad you liked the return of Superstalker, but WB could've made a lot more money (POTC money) if they had remained faithful to the character.
-
Superman has NEVER had broad appeal. Even when the first movie was released back in 79/80, it was only as successful as Star Trek: the Motion Picture. Why is Pirates popular? Same reason as Star Wars--basic plot, cool effects, something for both kiddies and adults. Superman doesnt appeal to teenagers or women. He's boring, over-powered, and has no interesting villains--end of story.
-
and so we keep him afloat while the rest of the world doesnt quite understand the appeal.
-
That's a ridiculous statement and you know it. Singer loves Superman, especially the donner film and he was very faithful to the character that is Superman. He followed all the rules. Now if you didn't like this superman or the story. hope it flops and it turns out you were right to hate it on these talkbacks. like every haters dream on this talkback. Well that's fine. that's a different story. But completely unfaithful to the character??? He wears blue tights a red cape. He has super strength. he's disguised as clark kent who works at the daily planet. hey wtf! I just mentioned a tiny portion of Superman returns and it's faithful to superman. Maybe you chose your words wrong? Maybe you should have said - 'this movie wasn't as faithful to the characters as i would have liked it to be.' because using the word 'completely' that's just a flat out lie.
-
Because it had established actors who provided good draw and an established, highly successful tentpole film from which to spring. The only guys who predicted that Pirates would lose money to Superman were, of course, in charge of this site and the idiot talkbackers that follow them. Its a no brainer.
-
Dressing up like Superman and exhibiting the powers is not all there is to the character. Superman is not morose. Superman is not obssessed with his alien heritage to the exclusion of all else. Superman would not walk away from Lois without explaining to her why he was leaving. He would not attempt to seduce her when he returned, he would respect that she had moved on and not stalk her and her kid. But that's the whole problem - they look like Lois and Superman, but they don't act like them. Because Singer broke the myth so he could tell his story about alienation and gods and men.
-
arguing about movies no one will give a shit about in six months time. by that time, as always, another debate such as this one will arise and again the cycle continues. superman returns, disappointing but still a noble effort. pirates, fun but utterly forgetful. hopefully, lady in the water is decent but i think that will be a monumental letdown as well. oh well, there is always next year and with 2007, we get hot fuzz. now you may continue with your regularly scheduled bitchfest...already in progress.
-
have had broad appeal when the first film came out, just admit that it was targeted to a broad audience. The tagline: "You'll Believe A Man Can Fly!" - they were going for the same audience as Star Wars. Obviously a lot has changed since then and the Reeve movies (for better in some cases, and for worse in others) are imbedded in the national consciousness. So don't give me that line that Superman Returns was not targeted to the broadest audience possible. They had a KID in it, for pete's sake!
-
Harry said it in his post .. its 2 and a half hours long, and you never feel it. Superman is 2 and a half and you really, really do feel it. And Pirates is much more madcap and fun. Fuck you, you super serious Superman movie, Pirates is where it is AT!
-
hate to say it but all of the points superninja brings up are ones i have had with friends who were wondering if singer loved donner's take on the material why did he alter it so? hell, he altered it to the point where he made superman slighty stalkerish. looks are deceiving but next time i will know better. one thing i give singer is the fact that he allowed his film to unfold rather than jumble everything together and hope something coherent would come of it.
-
a sassy kid like one of those from those Spy Kids movies. Yeah.
-
Having seen Ms. Knightley in person, I can tell you she's cute but has kind of an odd build that plays really well on celluloid - broad shoulders, longer torso than legs. As for the beanpole part, she's not that tall. Okay, so she's an amazon next to, say, Winona Ryder or Prince, but she's nowhere near supermodel stature. Now that we've gotten the superficial out of the way.....
-
The film had to live up to some pretty wild expectations, given how popular and iconic the first one has become. I thought Davey Jones is a great character, but a little less of him would have gone a bit farther. They went a long way for a sight gag - making Jack Sparrow into a human shish kabob complete with veggies comes to mind - and some things went by pretty fast. As sequels go, it's seaworthy.
-
...are sad. A lot of bitter people around here.
-
Like A GO GO AMAZING HERO ATTACK!!!!! http://tinyurl.com/gu9ek
-
Why am I always scared to go to these tiny URL things that hardly ever give a real hint of what they are about. And as I said before there's plenty of room in my heart for POTC, Superman, Star Wars, Spiderman, etc. Is that so hard for some people to conceive of? You're not somehow cool because you talk about how much better one movie is than another movie. Superman was not trying to be a better movie than Pirates and Pirates was not trying to be better than Superman. Different films, and people with any real level of intelligence could see that.
-
You must have left for popcorn. The three-way swordfight on the beach that made its way to the ruins of the fort--sorry you just watched Keira mugging and throwing things. And no, I don't consider the silly thing with the waterwheel as a swordfight--it was hijinks. But agreed, it was not exactly Flynn vs. Rathbone. And why all this turmoil here about SR and PoTC? Like I said before---Get a Grip!
-
From Box Office Guru: Falling from the number one spot, Superman Returns saw its sales drop 57% from last Friday to an estimated $6.9M. For the weekend, Warner Bros. could see its gross fall to around $22-25M.
-
The first POTC 2 TalkBack was WAY better than this one. The first one had a more interesting story and, in my opinion, more characterization. This TalkBack just doesn't have the magic. It's not as plot-driven; it's just a bunch of flashy FX.
-
Next time don't get all wet when you hear a price tag of a film.
-
where are the great movies this summer? oh well, maybe Miami Vice.
Also...box office returns does not make a movie great you twits...a turd sprinkled in gold dust is still a turd. -
i will repeat again. The film looked great and was technically very good. However story was bloated and unwielding and there were too many characters and not enough wit for the depster. This is not the end of POTC, in an interview depp hinted that he wasnt finished with this character and POTC 4,5,6 are a possibility. I do think that cast shke up is in order. Bloom and Knightley will have to go, at some stage.
-
X3 sucked... I went to see Supes yesterday and was dissappointed in that mess... I hope this is better.
-
Set ups the finale thus. After thinking that jack has stolen his heart, Davy jones swears revenge and goes after sparrow not realiising that EI trading company has know got control of all seas. Barbarossa wants his ship back and he is the only one who is willing to go to the ends on the earths. because he is dead. What swann and turner dont know of course is that Sparrow himself his half zombie, dont believe watch the end of the first film again. There is a clue in the opening minutes where jack is a coffin. POTC 3 sets up the showdown between sparrow, davy jones and Barbarossa and maybe even beckett. potc3 will be the film where norrington dies because(or is he dead already?. I cant wait for the thrid one.
-
That POTC was going to be the Biggest film of the summer and of the year.
-
We the viewers are the winners here. why are people focussing on which movie made more money when none of you will see a cent from it.
-
Jack wasn't dead at all in the coffin. That was a prison for captured pirates. Jack had simply been caught between films, and this was another great way to introduce him, just like they did in the first one on the sinking small boat at the start. Jack no longer has the aztec curse. It ended when the final piece of gold was dropped back in the chest at the finale of part one. The monkey re-activated the curse at the end credits...but only for him, or the guy with the wooden eye and the other fat pirate would be dead as well. The curse left barbosa, and he died at the end of the first movie....the voodoo woman brought him back. He's all flesh and blood when he appears at the end of pirates 2...thats why he was eating the apple. When they were dead, he never ate, because it did him no good...he would only watch others eat with wicked curiosity and want. Just him eating the apple, the way he did...it was obvious he was alive and ready to be the bad ass pirate he once was.
-
First a POTC official ( what the fuck does that even mean) talkback, and now a POTC opening weekend talkback?? WTF? where 's the news man? Go work on your ghost town (if that ever comes out) or something
-
Seriously, Click just got turned off.
About all this box office hoopla, everyone needs to calm down. Superman has not been a massively popular character as of late as he has in the past. The world has moved to more tragic and flawed heroes, hence why there was not the huge rumble of box office. The film still had a good opening, just not the ridiculous one people were vastly overestimating...and yes Singer did fuck with the Superman mythology, but that's another story, still a pretty good movie.
POTC II on the other hand had the return of probably the most iconic character of this DECADE! Indiana Jones, Darth Vader, Spiderman, Jack Sparrow. It no longer seems odd to see his name thrown around with these. People were excited for a good, family time, sure, but the character that the writers and Depp created are what made all this buzz. It wasn't the fuckin' Kraken for christ's sake, nor Orlando, nor Davy Jones. It was the promise of more deceit and mischief by one Captain Jack Sparrow. At this moment in time, he is more popular than Supes, hands down. NOW, if he still is in 60 years, then I suppose we can really start comparing the two. -
I liked the idea of Marvel's most iconic hero holding that record, I feel that Spider-Man got that movie based on the character, movie and story alone. Titanic was not a great movie so much as a million little girls went to see that movie repeatedly and gave it its unlikely record it holds to this day. I feel Pirates (while being a good flick) was given that extra push from little obsessive girls and their infatuation with primarily Johnny Depp and second fiddle Orlando Bloom. I saw Pirates a week and a half ago and the screening I was at had a good amount of young girls clucking away. The ones that sat near me wouldn't shut up about Johnny Depp and how she was going to see this movie a million times. After looking at the opening day numbers I look back on that and realize she wasn't kidding.
-
The monkey was his. The monkey reactivated the curse by grabbing the coin and then brought the coin to a dying Barbossa, thus saving his life. OR, Tia Dalma did just resurrect him, though, she better have a damn good reason, because it's very random that she would bring him back even before Jack came to her the first time (Barbossa was on the floor of her hut when they walked in the first time... You see his boots and the monkey runs over to him).
-
Yes the two movies are different, BUT Superman should have been a fun action/adventure movie like POTC. That's its problem. Singer went out of his to reference the Donner film, took everything he could from diagloue to plot but decided not to make it a FUN movie. Superman is not a drama. If he wasn't going to be consistent, why did he bother making it a sequel? Just start over from scratch. The answer is nostalgia. Without those nods and winks to the original, no one would be defending this Superman.
-
have you seen superman movies or smallville at all?
-
Can we watch someone trying to steal something from someone sleeping? When will was stealing the key from davey jones, it was udderly retarded. He would have woken up the second will entered the fucking room. It should have been a huge fight for the key.
-
Does anyone else think that SR and POTC were both amazing and outstanding reasons for their own reasons and all this bickering and comparing is stupid? Does one really have to be considered better than the other? Superman was a great emotional film with some of the best visuals ever in a superhero movie. It took itself very seriously. If you think it should have been more like POTC, with humor and comic relief characters thrown in than I have good news for you; they tried that in superman movies before. They were called Superman III and IV.
This is not to say that I Think POTC was silly either. It was a perfect blend of humor and action and it was an equally brilliant movie. But comparing these movies is like comparing Harry Potter to Lord of the Rings. One is supposed to be a serious emotional epic and the other is supposed to be a fun adventure for families. That doesn't make one better than the other. -
This movie has a huge plot.
some of it is not immediately in the open.
we see where jack sparrow will be going right at the begining in the opening scene.
we see about the east india trading company .
ABout elizabeth slowly becoming a pirate.
We see how jack stopped running from everything ion the end.
Even a lot of hidden adult jokes.
LIke "my compass does work "
I think a lot of people didnt pay enough attention. I feel a lot of you will find al ot of stuff that you didnt see if you watch it a second time.
-
I'm not saying that Superman and all its sequels werent made to target broad audience, but rather that they all failed to reach the supposedly broad audience that exists for Superman. What I'm saying is that WB and AICN were both hyping this sucker to an audience that largely doesnt care about Superman. There is a reason most of the audience for Supes was males above the age of 30--we're the last generation that actually enjoys these sorts of stories. Most of Today's generation, even more so than mine, follow anti-heros and conflicted, reluctant leaders. Superman just doesnt play to anyone but optimistic, idealized people who enjoy their heros as heros and not the kind of guys that Patton would smack around for 5 minutes with his glove. Remember what happened to Aragorn in LOTR? Aragorn's entire personality changed from Heroic successor to Gandalf and became the reluctant leader, the reluctant lover, and the guilt-ridden human. Superman, as done by Brian, has a conflict--family issues. Personally, I dont find it too much of a departure for the character that Donner established; to me, the movie simply continues the plot. I love watching a character like Superman in our modern times. I guess I'm just saying that I understand your complaints, and they are valid ones, but I still got to see the superman hero character by the end of the movie. Remember, Donner's Superman gave up his powers in the second so it wasnt too hard to believe that he'd give up his role to find out if he had any of his people on Krypton. Heck, this was acheived even in the comics, where Supes went back to Krypton to check things out.
-
I think its a testament to Pirate's energy and fun that even though I fould the movie to have more than its fair share of problems I still had a good time at the theater. And for the record, X3 was a nice climax to the series, MI:3 was a surprisingly enjoyable film despite an annoying lead and two horrible prior films, Superman was one of the best times I've had in a theater, and Pirates was pretty good popcorn faire. Its been a nice time at the theater so far.
-
I dont think he's seriously proposing that; I think he's just answering a fanboy question. Remember, there is no way that WB would ever let a movie like that happen unless both properties were already dead by themselves. A batman/supes movie would cost twice as much to reach the exact same audience.
-
And now I shit my thoughts out onto the internet.
-
Except....I liked Superman a lot better. I'm not comparing the two, because you just cant, but overall, I feel that superman was the better movie. For everyone saying that superman didnt have humor and fun, are you joking? It was filled with it. Spider-man will always have the perfect blend though. Overall, I liked POTC 2, but the original was far superior. This one was allright, but I was disappointed. Not majorly, but a little. Some of the fights just seemed to go on forever and were basically pointless. Depp's entrance was nowhere near as great as the first movie. Davey Jones wasnt as good of a villain, and keira knightly got a tan in 1 day during the movie. She's pale in jail, overly fake tan in the rest of the movie.
-
I've liked all of his films, but Batman as the villain would be wrong. Maybe from Superman's POV at the beginning of the film, Batman might seem like a villain, but they point is that they put aside their different methods and work toward the same goals.
-
Superman has his own style and mythos, especially the Donner/Singer Superman; it just wouldn't work.
-
Remember, in the first movie, Supes still looked in Lois's purse, checked out her underwear, and was asked how "big" he was. I remember the uproar back then from Supes fans and its absolutely no different than what I hear from today's audiences. I'll grant you that in Singer's version Supes is a lot more alone, but that doesnt play any different than what they've been doing in the comics for the past twenty years or more and the Donner films.
-
but I just wanted to say, cool Time Bandit's pic Harry. I think I'll go and stick the dvd on, I love that film too.
-
Really dont know why Harry rates this so highly,the first film was just medioce and this is about on par..love depp but the rest of the cast have zero chemistry,dull convoluted storyline..very matrix reloaded..who agrees..it was ok nothing more..SUPERMAN RULES THIS SUMMER
-
Fun lil' film. Loved the voodoo swamp. I felt like I was back on the boat again w/ my ass all wet sittin'next to some scared kid's grandma. Capt. Jack was cool (especially at the "end") but I wanted more "Depp-isms" and a little less slapsticky shit from him. Kiera was savage. I loved her character's twist. Very surprising. (And hot!!! Needs more meat though.)Still don't like O.B. unless he's riding shileds w/ Spock ears. And Barbosa? WTF?!!! Can't wait for 3(A fucking year!!!)Where can I get an undead monkey to shoot at when I'm stressed? It's like a little hairy squeezy. Monkey's kick ass. I wouldn't normally want to shoot one. But if it kept coming back to life, that's okay. (Not for the monkey of course.)Pirates...good. People dressed as pirates to watch
Pirates...bad. -
Ebert didnt like SR at all and Richard Roper gave the movie a very mild thumbs up. I agree with what Ebert said about the difference between Spiderman and Batman compared to Supes. Superman is too wholesome and therefore is not as flawed as the others. That is why he has failed to connect with modern audiences. There is a line from "the world doesnt need saving and I neither do I".When ordinary men wrestle for the control of a plane, who needs a guy in cape and tights. I will be seeing this film next week it opens in Ireland. People are tired with Sandler and his shtick.
-
I really wanted spiderman to stay on top forever, but I guess its not gonna happen. Maybe Spidey 3? Probly not though.
-
of this trilogy.
My ass was numb after this over long film.
They over complicated the plot, Kiera Knightley is as annoying as ever, Norrington felt tacked on, there was waaaay to much CGI, and lastly - Orlando Bloom felt like he was in the script as a contractual obligation.
I will say this - I loved the ending, both Jack Vs the Kraken AND especially Barbossa - he should show Davey Jones how to be a proper villain in the next one, rather than a merchandising action figure with a big claw!
I'm sure I'll get flamed for this, so I'll end on a high note - bring on Part 3!! (when's it out?) -
And hand it over to Mori. Mori seems to be a much better writer than harry is. After ten years, this site needs a bit of resturcturing. the only new member of staff that harry has appointed is the mysterious merrick. Harry clearly sees himself as some kind of Mogul, mabe this is all his head, who knows? Every idea that harry has had in the past has either fallen short, or never materialised. Maybe he needs someone to cut him. like a ramsay figure. just my two scents....
-
wwith the box officee and all( im nit being sarcastic, jusyt on LSD)
-
next year if he's gonna get his record back from pirates. {rim shot} ha ha. yeah, that was corny.
-
The script was a mishmash of ideas without any drive. The characters had almost no arc. Elizbeth changed some. Jack and Will did not. The only interesting character was Norrington - he had fallen hard and was the most driven of anyone in the film. The action set pieces were live action wily e coyote crap - shiskabob, big wheel/cage, the swordfight on the wheel. CGI Kraken wasn't that great...CGI still looks like crap in action. The film dragged like crazy in the first hour and the last 45 minutes. Saying the film is a two parter is NOT a decent excuse for it being so meandering, unfocused and bland. It was Matrix 2, not Empire Strikes Back mid-film quality. The few smart lines were hidden amongst lots and lots of crappy expository dialogue.
-
Harry, will you please get your mouth off of Singer's cock now? He has ruined the Superman franchise in less than 2 weeks!!! He's a goddamn disgrace.
-
I was falling asleep during the first half. What's with all the rolling shit in the action scenes???
-
Not shabby, PotC. And with no big releases next week, it should be able to make another 60 easy.
Meanwhile Supes is, sadly, DOTW. $140 and not likely to get above 160. Of course, they'll make their money back on the DVDs and toys, but still, another lackluster BO performance for what should have been bigger than God (or Passion, whatever). -
$132 million is just TWO DAYS. That total doesn't figure in Sunday yet. Should easily end up somwhere north of $180 million. That's HUGE beyond belief.
-
If the crew has to go to the ends of the earth to bring back Jack, and Barbosa is mentioned as the only captain who knows the way, wouldn't it make sense that Barbosa himself went there when he died and came back? He's not undead -- him biting into the apple with gusto is proof of that.
-
Wow, you need to learn a little about BO reports on sundays. Sunday reports show the estimate for the weekend. So...http://boxofficemojo.com/daily/chart/
****** $132 million is the estimate for the ENTIRE weekend. The film didn't do $77 million on saturday. -
Too bad, I'd like to have seen Brainiac or Darkside on the big screen.
-
It never ceases to amaze me when morons on messageboards get into heated arguements about a films box office average and 2nd week and all this other crap. who gives a fuck? the producers aren't looking to AICN talk backs for help in their predictions.
-
can he teleport too?I mean jack was looking at him far away and boom he's right there on the boat with him.Why didn't he do that all the time?And you know he will step on land in the next one 10 years or not.
-
The story and plot make no sense. The Humor is mostly slapstick. All the great scene checks in the film were taken from far better movies. IT DOES NOT MATTER. You will smile and enjoy everthing in this film. I cannot wait for 3. Ignore the critics on the web. They are treating Jerry Bruckhemimer as if he made a sequel to Citizen Kane. This is old school fun movie magic. It is a silly stupid high energy mad house and I had fun every minute of it.
-
Jack the Monkey was up to some hi-jinx in the first POTC at the end of the credits that obviously could have had to do w/Barbosa's resurrection. To those who didnt like this flick, check your jadedness at the door next time. This movie will make bank, rest assured for quite some time. My wife already wants to go again w/our boys. Replay value built into this sucker. It was just a damned entertaining movie with interesting characters. Summer '07 cant get here soon enuf. Back to the trough one more time before the DMC DVD comes out this winter. Later Scalleywags!
-
Halfway into this flick, I almost started playing Tetris & Uno on my cell phone. Boooo-ring. Best part of the whole damn movie was the new Disney logo at the beginning. Bring on Spidey 3, mateys!
-
I really glad you resisted that urge because I think half the audience would have thrown shit at you. It is amazing how divided people are about this film.
-
Didn't Harry have enuf talkbacks for SR so you have to come in here and pollute your apologies into this one as well? Come on people, if you have ever ready any Superman comic books growing up, Lex Luthor wasnt the only villain. Gawd Singer, leave the old films to themselves. Get fresh w/some new villains damnit!
-
This movie's just too damn long! It should have been 90 minutes, not two and a half hours! Stiil. it'll fill the movie houses with silvering swag! Check out the movie review on askaninja.com
-
Thats kind of a bold statement considering its more than likely to break even during its theatrical run, has earned 1.5 billion in advertising/merchandising revenue, and will more than likely make a ton of cash on dvd sales. No, there will be a sequel, you can bet on that.
-
Everyone expected Pirates to blow SR out of the box office water opening weekend -- and it IS a great movie. However, the bigger question is staying power. How many people will see Pirates more than once, whereas I think Superman geeks will see SR repeatedly throughout the summer -- who will have the bigger box office total at the end of the season. That being said, SR could take some lessons from Pirates as to how to be a fun action movie. And BOTH movies were 30 minutes too long.
-
no matter how good it is. if the movie flops. it's considered a failure by the majority and it gets this label of being a bomb. so it's important for the movies rep that it's a boxoffice success
-
I loved Superman Returns, but I do feel there needs to be a more epic battle between good and evil come next film, not to mention a little inventiveness. By the way, i meant to type over a billion in merchandising revenue, not 1.5
-
If you do you're an apologist. Why? I enjoyed Superman Returns. That's a fact. I have nothing to apologize about. You think singer should use a different villian. That's your problem with the movie. You get let down. don't try and bring me down with you.
-
The problem is, as has been stated before, that the film will only break even with its cost. Well, guess what? Batman Begins was in the same boat and they've already greenlit a sequel. George Lucas was right when he said films pretty much break even theatrically; most of their profit is made from video sales and merchandising. Thats what happened with Batman Begins, Star Trek (up until the aptly named nemisis), the original 89` batman (although the film earned 300 mill, it earned little profit on the film's theatrical earnings but earned over a billion in merchandising and another 70 mil in rentals), and the list goes on and on. This film will break even by the end of its theatrical release, will have earned the studio well above a billion in revenue, and will earn quite a bit on dvd sales. This is the main reason that WB already confirmed a sequel before the film was even released: the merchandising is simply too much of a cash cow for the studio.
-
isnt contemplating the improved box office success when they release a sequel. SR is a blockbuster film and will imbedded itself further in the culture by the time a sequel will be released, and will thus have a much higher earning. Same thing happened with X-men and a slew of other films and the same thing will undoubtedly happen again.
-
If you listen to his review. He says "all of New York floods and then apparently all the water just recedes." Okay Ebert, I know you're sick and all and I wish you the best. But when did the city get flooded??? The ground cracked up. gas shot out of manholes and a shockwave hit the city. When did the city get flooded? A wave splashes hard against the coast, but that's all. Which makes me ask. Are these critics really paying attention or just seeing what they wanna see when they watch movies? --- http://tvplex.go.com/buenavista/ebertandroeper/today.html
-
probably a bit of both. remember, Ebert figured the best thing for the movie was to have the kid be plucky and act like one of the Culkin kids. The fact remains that save for Batman, Ebert really doesnt like comic book movies--he thinks they're kiddy faire that should be treated without reverence. He liked Spiderman 2 because of the train sequence, but beyond that he really didnt care too much for it. In most summer faire flicks, he doesnt even pay attention to names of characters or motivations and merely calls them bumpy head guy or maniacal madman number 3; an obvious and ham-fisted way to downplay franchise films or "mass audience" films. Again, Ebert is the symbol of what's wrong in Hollywood. He feels that if a film should play to the masses, it should be as stupid as possible (ala Garfield 2) and art films should be blissfully detached. He's the same guy that penned Valley of the Dolls 2 as his only film attempt.
-
I don't know if anyone else noticed this (I stopped reading about 3/4 of the way down, so if this is redundant, sorry...), but the voodoo lady's heart pendant matched a pendant that was hanging from Davy Jones' organ in one scene. I cannot remember which scene exactly, but Jones was playing the organ, and the camera pans to the pendant. Both pendants match, and they also match the lock on the chest.
-
costs $260 million to make and has only made $140 million so far and will struggle to get to $200 million by the end of it's domestic box office run. WB should be quite aware that the public doesn't care for Superman Returns and didn't find it as overly exciting as previous summer releases. Taking solace in a 75% critical rating ins't going to help their bottom line.
-
he also hated spiderman but liked spiderman 2 because it "lent weight to the character." Now, if you can tell me how Spiderman 2 was different from spiderman 1 in any way other than a slight improvement to special effect texturing and a killer train sequence, then you should be reviewing movies more alongisde Ebert.
-
Yeah, tough luck when a film just breaks even, huh? I guess if we lived in your world we'd never have a sequel to Batman Begins, the original Batman, X-men, or a slew of other sequels. There's a reason they're called tent-pole films: they earn money from various medias. Superman already made the studio a killing in merchandising (1.3 or 1.4 billion is the estimate), will have paid for itself by the end of its theatrical run, and will assuredly make a huge profit when its released on DVD. Put it to you this way, would you be willing to bet 20 dollars that a sequel isnt made, always there?
-
I guess it's his happening and it freaks him out? But seriously. He's also more interested in complex heroes and Superman just isn't that complex. You have a character like Clark Kent that seems out of place and dated for this time. Well I like that about him. If he was all preppy or like that welling guy from smallville. I'd puke. Clark is supposed to be simple. he's also a kind and clumsy nerd. He's also a nice person trying to save the day. What's wrong with that? Why do all heroes nowaday have to be dark and complex? the badass. I hate the Spiderman films. I can't relate to a young college student hero, like peter parker. I hate tobey maguires voice too. When he talks in the costume. he's the lamest superhero ever. he's a spider guy with a luchadors mask. wow
-
Soooo glad to hear Pirates beat out Spider-Man as the top weekend grosser. In the end who gives a shit I guess, but it's nice to see the much overrated Spider-Man off of the top spot. Pirates was a pretty good movie overall. As much as you could expect. And no, that's not the "nail in the coffin" for Superman Returns. It is going to be a modest hit at least. When DVD comes out, it will garner close at least $250 million and up. People get so bent out of shape here when they compare the budget of the film to the gross. There's more to it then that. No, it's not the hit Warners wanted, but lik Universal's Kong, it was a worthy effort. Superman will be back strong three years from now. And yes, I am retarded (regarding my earlier post of spoilers). I had seen it already, but didn't read Harry's message). But anyway, good to see a fun flick do so well. Spider-Man 3 will of course have a great run next summer (God knows why with Tobey "my line delivery is like nails on a chalk board" Maguire, and probably too much bad videogame like CG like the first two). Personally, I think Transformers will rule that year and surprise everybody.
-
well, i happen to like spiderman for what he is: the weirdo of superheros. Even among other superheros, Spiderman is often reguarded as the weird one whose treated as a nerd. Spiderman is indeed the born loser, which makes him so much fun. Batman is another interesting character because of his will and human drive; he's neither conflicted nor scared. He's the Dirty Hary of superheros. Superman, my other fav, is the John Wayne--the good man who inspires others. I think all three of them have their rightful place among superheros and are immensely popular for a reason--each one fullfills a certain role better than any other character in comics. Yeah, wolverine is a dirty hary character, but nowhere near as good at it as Batman. Many characters try to have that sort of ironic/everyman status that Spiderman has acheived, but none come close. And Superman, of course, is in his own little world/niche that no one has been able to emulate.
-
Superman Returns, the horrible just my luck and, a real suprise, was the Guardian. With Costner and Kutcher. this looks like one of those films that could tank. Something to do with the ocean resuce, i guess.....yawn.
-
Basically, there are two possibilities.
1. The one that everyone seems to be latching on is that Tia Dalmer brought him back, either through Voodoo or through her powers as Calypso.
2. The other possibility is actually referenced in the first film. At one point, someone described Barbossa as "a man so evil that even Hell spit him out." The implication was that even before the curse, Barbossa died and found some way to come back from the dead. Thus, it was possible for him to come back a second time.
This is the reason why he will be integral to the plot of the third movie. As someone who has been to the end of the world and come back from the dead, he has knowledge that can aid others in doing so.
3. By the way, his eating the apple is also referenced in the first film. At one point he tells Elizabeth that when he comes back from the dead the first thing he will do is eat a bushel of apples. -
Depp should so guest spot on Entourage. Cause this makes it offical: Depp is the coolest motherfucker EVER!. Natch
-
When DJ found Bootstrap, BS was still under the effects of the Aztec curse. DJ BROKE the undead curse on BS, and RECURSED him into an immortal barnacle man. Anyone else find that interesting???
-
People say the Cannibal Island scene was pointless but how was it anymore pointless than the Millenium Falcon stuck in stupid asteroid with mynocks.
-
Did anyone else notice how Kiera's face suddenly gets chubby in the middle of the movie, then gets thin again?
-
132 Million. Damn. I thought this was a better film than the first, especially the 2nd half, but I have little regard for Pt 1 beyond Johnny's inspired performance...And Kiera's anoerxic face could never be described as chubby. Funnily enough, I found her more attractive in her tom boy pirate garb than in her frilly dresses. Maybe I'm just queer and don't know it yet.
-
I'll take that--during the entire cave scene, Han and Leigh's true feelings and character relation were advanced. On cannibal island, the only thing that happened was mindless action. There was NO character interaction and the 45 minute sequence did NOT advance the plot, and when there is no character or plot advancement in a certain sequence, that sequence is considered filler.
-
ever made". I don't get Ebert sometimes, but I know that him and Roeper spoke very well of Spider-Man 2. -
I dont know why, but i seemed to remember him giving the film 3 stars--I guess I'm losing it. Still, I dont understand how he can give spidey 2 4 stars and the original only 2 and a half. The only thing different between both those movies was a train sequence; both had cartoony special effects. Not that that is a problem for my ability to suspend disbelief, but Ebert's entire hate for the first movie was because of Peter's alienation and cartoony effects. Exactly what changed in the second film? Hell, Peter was even MORE alienated. Then again, Ebert also disliked War of the Worlds because he felt tripods were illogical.
-
I understand you like the film, and thanks for remaining civil. As for Batman vs Superman, it is not really a true versus movie. They have a misunderstanding and then cooperate. Actually, their philosophies work well together when they cooperate. Making them against each other is flat out stupid. Oh, and I hate Frank Miller's Batman and his Batman vs Superman the Fascist story. Miller thinks he's funny, but he's really just a pretentious jerk.
-
This film was so boring I actually got severe arse-numbness. It took forever to get going, went almost nowhere when it did. The first was much better, and that's no great shakes.
-
I agree that tripods are illogical, as is blood harvesting. The point, however, that you suspend disbelief. LOTR isnt very logical because you can just fly one of the eagles to Mt. Doom and save yourself a huge trip. Star Wars isnt logical cause the Death Star wasted its time clearing the planet Yavin when it could have just shot Yavin and then shot the rebel moon base. Matrix isnt logical cause you dont have to combine fusion with human bodies to use human bodies for energy; just use the fusion *duh*, or if you're hell bent on using body heat, just use cows or something. Jaws, Indiana Jones, Indipendence Day, Twister, James Bond films, even the Godfather, are all illogical. Its called SUSPEND YOUR DISBELIEF, Moviemack. And you wonder why nerds are considered social outcasts and get beaten up...
-
Believe me, its nice to be able to disagree comfortably and humourously on this end, too. Unless someone is being a troll, I never ever get angry for disagreements.
-
Batman has a long history of cooperating with others to get the job done. While your gripes about the film are quite legitimate, please don't act like Batman is out of character. Superman, on the other hand, has never been this selfishly motivated, an absent parent, or a stalker. Fess up.
-
It is always nice conversing, even if I do get a little antagonistic (it is AICN after all).
-
davy jones only helped bootstrap get free from the cannon he was attached to. when davy helped him get loose, he was still under the curse, thats why he wasnt dead from being under water, but then later the curse was lifted, nothing to do with anything davy jones did.
-
Lets see: how do we inject our political agenda into comics? I know, lets make Batman the cynical, anti establishment to the Reaganism that Superman represents? Heck, he even drew Superman to look like a young, idealized Reagan! And then, when he decides to make Batman All Star or whatever the heck its called, he treats Batman like some sort of caricature and obvious irreverance. Again, Frank Miller is an intensely cynical man and it shows in everything he does; including his inability to understand Batman and Superman.
-
So its all good, right? Yeesh, was ever Dark Knight Returns ever ham-fisted!
-
The entire point of the fellowship taking the ring by foot was SECRECY! The entire time, Saruman, and Sauron, ASSUMED they were just going to take the ring to Minas Tirith, attempt to use it, and attack Mordor. IT NEVER CROSSED THEIR MINDS THAT THE FELLOWSHIP WAS TRYING TO GO TO MORDOR. It was Sauron's ego that was his downfall. Never in a million years could a party of just NINE people, let alone TWO lone hobbits, EVER infiltrate mordor, get to the mountain, and toss the ring in. Now, if they had hopped upon the eagles, and B-Lined it for Mordor, the jig would have been up, and Sauron would have figured out what was going on and mounted a MASSIVE defence around mount doom so that no one could get in. And no, the eagles could not have flown high enough to evade arrows, and just drop the ring in the mountain. Who know what could catch it on the way down, and IF they flew low enough to be able to target the mountain more accurately, they'd be shot down by orc archers. You see now, why they couldn't have just flown the ring to mordor? PLEASE STOP BEING IGNORANT FUCKS ABOUT LOTR PEOPLE. FOR THE LAST TIME, THEY COULD NOT HAVE JUST FLOWN THE RING TO MORDOR!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
And you know this for fact? When exactly is that explained in the movie?
-
oh wait sorry, that was pirates 2. obviously. superman blows dick and made a pathetic 21 million. yeah that sounds more like it. and holy fucking shit it completely blew the record away. very impressive pirates, very impressive.
-
basically common sense, but im pretty sure thats the way it happened because bootstrap was helplessly stuck under the water and davy jones freed him in return for his service. and then, im assuming, the curse was lifted.
-
Spidey1 and Spidey2 from a character standpoint. Spidey1 was completely by the numbers. Thankfully, Peter is a likeable character and it's a good template. The second film, however, is a major improvement in capturing Peter's personality and watching him grow into an adult and think seriously about his future.
-
It was very . . . average. By way of contrast, "Superman Returns" was far better, and probably will end up being the best movie of the summer. I predict that POTC:DMC's box office will be one of the most front-loaded in history, and that Superman Returns will end up out-grossing it over the long run.
-
I think it's kinda funny that Poor BS gets cursed TWICE in his lifetime. Hell, maybe they'll make it a joke and curse him a third time for the next film, lol.
-
Nice way to sidestep the question. Also, I must confess that I'm shocked ID4 is considered a "nerd flick," as you call it, to say nothing of Godfather or the original Star Wars. For some reason, I keep thinking about all the people that went to see those films, accepted them, and all the cultural icons those films introduced. Moviemack, I am most deffinitely a nerd/geek/jock/intillectual/goof-off/serious/leader type-a personality and freely admit it. One thing i am not, however, is negative, incendiary, and spiteful. Personally, if there is something I hate or loathe in the entertainment industry (be it books, music, movies, or television), I dont talk about it or fill my day with it. But hey, thats just me.
-
haha that would be awsome, although he has to serve davy jones for eternity now after purposly losing that dice game to save will.
-
Yeah, but the next movie is supposed to take place in or around asia. Maybe after they slay DJ, BS will get cursed by an asian deity and get turned into an Immortal Ninja! Fuck Yes!
-
Your telling me he just was born that way, fully emerged? Sorry, pal. The film is called Batman BEGINS.
-
He was probably an inch from death by end of movie 1 and the monkey dropped a cursed aztec coin in his pocket (monkey was still cursed by end of movie 1 according to scene at end of credits). Thus, bringing Barbossa back to life... or death... or whatever you want to call it. Loved the sequel, will be seeing it again. I hope movie 3 doesnt go all "search for spock" on us.
-
There is very little Dawson's Creek-style angst. In fact, for once, the girl is not there so Batman can get laid. She is there to remind him of what his parents stood for. Unnecessary perhaps, but it's not teenage soap opera angst. You have good criticism of the film (most of which I agree with) but completely exaggerating does not help your points.
-
It's all because of that trailer. Best trailer I've ever seen, got applause from everyone every single time I saw it in theaters. Good job, Pirates, good job. Finally, a movie that deserves it.
-
Again, this is consistent with his characterization in the comics currently. I do get your point, though. For instance, I wanted a swordfight with Batman and Ra's Al Ghul and for him to not be a pasty white guy.
-
I'll believe that a Superman Returns sequel will come to fruition when WB announces it. Until then you and all the Supes fan better hope that it does make a killing in the international box office and that Jon Peter's merchandise sells by the truckloads.---As for Batman Begins, that's a completely different situation. It cost $100 million less and had the legs to reach slightly over $200 domestically. Again, if WB is foolish enough to give Singer and his two writers free reign with another Superman movie after how the dissapointment it's been so far (in the states) then so be it.
-
written like that, you would have a valid point. But, she's just not.
-
Look, I've been reading LOTR since I was 11, have seen the movies more than a few times, and I even have a tattoo of J.R.R. Tolkein's symbol on my upper left arm, so please under stand, I say the following with no spite or malice: the eagles could have dropped the ring into Mt. Doom. Tolkein even acknowledged this in an interview when he stated that the entire point of his story was for enjoyment and the suspension of disbelief was important to the story, owing much to the critics' disdain (at the time). Tolkein did in fact acknowledge the eagles and stated, in his typically grandfatherly fashion, that if he'd done that, the story would have been shorter and nowhere near as interesting.
-
i was there on opening night when spidey opened in 2002 and it got the top weekend ever. then i was there opening 4th of july weekend for spidey 2 which didn't beat the record but got the july 4th record. pirates 1 i saw 2 days after it came out after "ending up seeing it and liking it" then i rode the ride with 13 people who saw that first movie the SAME EXACT NIGHT and so it was more elusive than the other 5 times because jack sparrow rules all unholy traces of hell at this point. {if i wind up getting a jack sparrow or davy jones action figure in the near future just for the hell of it} and now i am seeing pirates 2 tonight with my sister and her boyfriend and his brother after going from probably end up seeing this to wanting to see this to getting excited to see it looking at all the info, clips, hype and the HUGE ASS AMOUNTS OF MONEY IT MAKES. i wouldv'e rented the 1st movie last nite to do one of those "catch up to everything" kind of things but blockbuster didn't have it because everyone had the same fucking idea. duh. so i wait till saturday nite to watch the 1st movie on usa network to do a "see how it all began" kind of thing and do a pirates double feature when i see the second movie at 7:30 {the 7:15 show, hopefully not sold out like everything else these days, with 15 minutes of awesome previews} and by the way, i would pass on the piece of shit "funny" scene at the end of the credits because it's so obvious what it is and it's just not worth staying 10 minutes of looking at a long list of very multi-talented people who worked hard on this and listening to a pop tempo pirate tune at the same time. it's just that the ending, from what i heard, sounds like people who don't or do know there is a 3rd movie coming next year would be more than enough especially after 2 hours and 31 minutes of summer popcorn blockbuster fun from start to finish and you have to pee before you go in and NO ARCADE GAMES FOR YOU CRANE ADDICTS. sorry, that's how it is these days. also, today is the 3 year mark of the 1st movie and once again i am there {at the theater}when a huge ass movie gets the top weekend ever and i am also watching a pirates movie 2 days after it's release. if anyone was moved or inspired by this interesting tale, feel free to respond. and i'll be back here tommorow afternoon with my pirates 2 review. thanx. peace. yo-ho. a talkbacker's life for me.
-
have interfered with Frodo's destiny? Also, the Eagles seem to serve a particular purpose, not just, "Hey, Eagle, can you take out the trash for me?" "Hey, Eagle, I have a ring I need you to get rid of." They're like angels.
-
ID4 (which is easier to type) was a nerd film. That tells me all I need to know about your film tastes. Thanks!
-
Tolkein said that if his story were truly allegorical, the ring would have been used against Sauron and the hobbits would still have been enslaved in the service of the big people. By the way, why is Moonbuggy familiar to me? For some reason, that name is really stroking my brain.
-
Very, very funny.
-
How can Bryan Singer speak of Batman Vs. Superman? This guy just made a 300 million dollar dud and he wants to bury the other franchise WB has? If they do make B V S- Singer ( along with his 20- something writers ) should not be allowed on the WB lot! Give it to Nolan, not Singer.
-
IT'S A GIGANTIC HUGE SUCCESS!!! Haha! I just like getting under the haters skin.
-
What was everyone's favorite moment in pirates 1 and in pirates 2? For me, the coolest moment in 1 was Sparrow and Barbosa dueling under the moonlight. The second movie? probably the dice game--that seemed really neat.
-
...on the isle of Disney, three executives, named Greedy, Greedier and Greediest, wanted to ensure their sequel would earn as much box office as the first film, therefore, they hired EVERYONE who worked on the first one for the sequels, regardless of wether they died or not.
-
Favorite scene in first film: Elisabeth discovering the undead nature of the pirates (totally fun). Second film: the first appearance of the Flying Dutchman and Jones offering the dying sailors their choice.
-
Independence Day sucked and from somebody who goes to work every week with maybe the nerd heaviest crew of people outside a comic shop I can report that every one of them hates it. You know who doesn't hate it? My seven year old. She loves it. And so did a lot of other people, mainly because it blew up stuff good when the effects for doing so were pretty new. Superman? He'll get a sequel, and God willing, it will be better than this movie because I'd like to see a good Superman film. This wasn't it, in the same way that Phantom Menace wasn't good, but when it came out I was so emotionally invested in what I remembered from my childhood that it took me a couple of weeks to admit it. Batman Begins? Not nearly as good as one might believe if one lived at these boards, but it redeems itself well in the final act, in large part due to some great turns by Oldman and Caine. Kate Bosworth was bad in Superman Returns but she was better than Katie Holmes in Batman Begins, which may be the only small face to face match-up that Superman Returns wins in that comparison. Pirates was no masterpiece, but it does prove that audiences were dying for anything worth spending their money on, and it was that. And the idea that Superman Returns is somehow going to come back to outearn Pirates at the box office...what do you not understand about under twenty-five million for its second weekend?
-
When Barbossa says to Elizabeth, "There would be no sense to be killing you...yet. Apple?" It kills me everytime because of course Liz thought the apple was poisoned to kill her....great, great stuff. As for DMC, when Jack offers Tia Dalma payment..."Look! An undead monkey!" God, I loved that moment. And One-Eye reading the Bible...classic! And the reappearance of Barbossa!!!! I was literally jumping up and down in my seat, doing pelvic thrusts like an 11-year-old at the end of DMC. Damnit, this is the kind of movie where you give the audience what they want...just like in JAWS where Richard Dreyfuss pops up at the end and the audience cheers...when Rush took a bite out of that apple, I was in absolute heaven. I absolutely loved this movie... whatever you want to compare POTC to (Star Wars, Indiana Jones, whatever)...if AT WORLD'S END lives up to this, this trilogy will be in the top tier for sure. Can't wait to see it again!!!
-
next year is spidey 3 vs. pirates 3 vs. shrek 3! that is going to be insane. my money is on spidey 3. the teaser has been ridiculous and it has been three years since the last one. plus it has the head start being released may 4th. tensformers will undeform i feel much like superman returns this year. there just isn't a big enoguh audience for it. those three movies have a crossover audeince of men, women, and children. transformers might be a geekgasm for some but doesn't have the mass appeal to compete with those other three in my opinion.
-
will be awsome. transformers should be pissed off that shrek 3 opens 1 1/2 weeks after it, so that should knock off any longevity transformers was hoping to have. i think pirates 3 wont do as well as this one because people who didnt like #2 wont give the third one the chance it deserves. as far as spidey goes, look for it to challenge the new record set this weekend and to bring the box office crown back to the franchise.
-
my money is on shrek 3.... shrek 2 made soooooooo much money. it's got a much wider appeal than the other two. spiderman 3 and pirates 3 aren't nearly as good for kids. they'll probably both be decently dark.
there was some shit in pirates 2 that probably isn't the best for kids to see, imo. -
I mean really people...Shrek 2 wasn't nearly as good as the first one and the novelty has worn off. Shrek 3 will do very well, probably north of $300 million but won't reach the heights of the second one. As for Spidey, 2 made less than 1 at BO but also much better. POTC2 is also being recieved very well and way outperforming the first one. The one thing Spidey has going for it is that there has been more time since the last one (3 years) instead of POTC (1 year). We'll see...
-
check out www.boxofficemojo.com. despite a $132 million dollar opening weekends,there's been a daily dropoff since friday for deadman's chest. Superman returns hasn't opened everywhere yet,so it's too early to write it off. i saw deadman's chest yesterday...i preferred curse of the black pearl. i couldn't put my finger on it,but deadman's chest lacked something - i do feel that Johnny depp was kept in the background too much. i did enjoy it - not a total waste of time,but i rate it 3 out of 5 nonetheless.
-
1. Consistency between the first film and this one. The characters are note perfect. I challenge any 'hater' to find a glaringly obvious lapse in internal logic.
2. The SFX is a work of art. To the fucknut who whined about too much cgi, please pray tell the exact scenes where cgi, animatronics or prosthetics were used. I can guess, but I sure as hell can't tell.
3. The performances. Everyone good except the terrible twosome. Still with Kiera and Bloom actually not doing too bad at the end, I was pleasantly suprised.
4. Humour. This film was funny. And the comedy was multi layered. Yes there was lots of slapstick humour but if you watch carefully, you will see that there was sexual innuendo, puns, wit, word play, sight gags. It's just a pity that most of the good stuff was left for johnny depp.
5. Plot. The screenwiters elliot and rossio have been building up to this their entire careers. Here is the proof they are the real deal. Give them creative freedom and a huge budget and you will be taking money by the truck load.
Looks like we maybe seeing more of the disney-bruckheimer partnership. -
Domestically, at least. Now that the World Cup is finally over, we'll see how it does internationally. I wish it all the best. But plunging 58% in your second weekend, even against POTC2, is just BAD. There's no other word for it. The movie will STRUGGLE to make it to the $200 million mark and in all likelihood, finish with less than that. Poor Warner Bros...Disney--on the other hand--will be re-wall-papering all their offices with $1000 bills.
-
I don't whether or not Tolkein himself thinks the eagles could have just flown the ring there, he himself can't deny the facts he made up for the story: The fellowships journey and their goal is supposed to be a secret. And if the eagles HAD flown the ring to mordor, the only logical explanation of what would happen is the scenerio I made up from my last post. Remember, Gandalf even said, "saruman has many spies in his service. Birds, beasts." If those eagles had taken off towards mordor, Both Sauron and Saruman would have known what was up. Despite what Tolkein said, you actually DON'T have to suspend disbelief as far as the Fellowship's plan was concerned. It WAS a solid plan: Make the enemy think you're going to do one thing, when in fact, we're going somewhere else. Hell, the breaking of the fellowship HELPED them even. Sauron and Saruman went after the decoys (aragorn, gimli, legolas, pipin, merry) instead of going after the real threats (frodo and sam).
-
in my last post. thanks.
-
Here's a list of all the subplots and unresolved loose ends i've thought of from Dead Man's Chest. I'd like to say firstly that I thoroughly enjoyed this movie and can't wait for the finish. That third movie is going to have to fill a lot of potholes. Someone help me out if I missed anything. We've got:
-Captain Jack, William and Elizabeth's love triangle and Will and Elizabeth's marriage?
-Davey Jones' sea-woman love and the musical locket (that Tia Dalma also had on her table?)
-Getting to and resurrecting? Captain Jack by sailing to to World's End (with a resurrected LIVING apple-eatin Barbossa???)
-Liberating Bootstrap from Davey Jones
-A feisty east india trading company weasel with the heart of Davey Jones, what he plans to do with it, and the answer to what ties him to Jack Sparrow)
-Rescuing Elizabeth's father from whatever happened to him
-Chow-Yun Fat's character and all the Asian pirate enjoyment that is sure to ensue
That's six separate storylines, with the last one possibly branching out into 2 or even 3 more. Yowza.
-
well, superman has so far earned 140 domestic. Given the fact that BB was in theaters for nearly all of july and august, I think Superman ought to be able to pull in another 60 domestic, to say nothing of another 180 upon its european release (its earned 20 mil so far from its limited international release). Again, theatrically speaking, Superman is in the same boat Batman is in: they'll break even at the box office (an awesome feat considering the price tags of both films), successfully sell a hoard of dvds, and earn a king's ransom through merchandising.
-
thats not the point. the build up for these movies were so great, and when you spen hundreds of millions of dollars on a movie you arent just trying to break even at the box and then only get profits from dvds etc. when you spend all this money, they turn out is supposed to be great, as far as studio people are concerned. i can assure you, no one at WB is pleased with the way superman is performing at the box office. pirates 2 on the other hand, holy hell.
-
You thought superman returns would destroy POTC2 THIS SUMMER.. AND I KEPT TELLING YOU ALL THAT POTC WILL OWN THIS SUMMER... AND WHAT'S GOING ON RIGHT NOW??? IT'S @#$@#$ING OWNING THIS SUMMER!!! IM RIGHT, all of you ARE WRONG!! AHAHHAHAHAHAH I AM A GOD
-
(well, not too much)...I know you want to keep comparing Batman to Superman but Batman Begins had very good legs which allowed it to make it past $200 million...it did NOT drop almost 60% in its second weekend and also faced far less competition. Great thing about numbers...they don't lie (at least not as much)...So Moon, how much do you want to bet SR doesn't make $200 mil domestic? I'll bet $20 American (and mail it to you, Scout's-honor) if I'm wrong...you in?
-
Damn I can't believe POTC broke the box office records, mere weeks after Aquaman broke it.
-
AHAHAHA STUPID SUPERMAN!!! @#$@ YOU SINGER! YOU SCREWED UP... PEOPLE DONT WANT LEX LUTHOR AND SUPERMAN OFFSPRING.. THEY WANT ACTION, FIGHTING, SWASHBUCKLING FUN! THEY WANT POWERFUL DARKSEID AND POWERFUL BRAINIAC OR DOOMSDAY!! @#$@#$ING FILMMAKERS!! OPEN YOUR EYES
-
Should be interesting to find out what happens. I'm really gonna smack myself if it earns 199 mill, though ;). And wcoop, you are absolutely right: the studio clearly expected more from the box office than what it earned, wrongfully, I might add. And sites like AICN didnt help either, by hyping this thing up to the point that a few idiots actually thought this thing would do spiderman numbers. I personally figured it would earn about half a billion dollars when it was all said and done, and the film is clearly performing below my expectations. That said, I'm feeing pretty confident that this movie will earn 200 domestic and very likely 200 international; enough to break even.
-
I am going to use your $20 to buy POTC:DMC on DVD (certainly not SR). :P I know you probably liked POTC2 too and really these dueling movie rivalries are pretty dumb. I would've had no problem loving both SR AND POTC2...but alas, Superman Returns kinda sucked and that always hinders my love a bit.
-
That movie rocks. And there's enough in it that I was catching new stuff in the second viewing. Like watching the starfish slowly emerge from Bootstrap Bill's head. Like the Undead Monkey finding Barbossa at the first visit to the Voodoo Hut, and the stuff Jack pinched. And Barbossa's return has bugger all to do with Aztec gold - he'll have found his way back from the land of the dead via World's End, hence why Our Heroes need him to lead the way. And if Davy Jones can raise the Pearl once, he can raise it again. Absolutely brilliant fantasy adventure, and I think I'm gonna go see the damn thing a third time during the big screen run, dragging more helpless landlubbers with me.
-
Batman earned 48 million its opening weekend (not counting the thirty mill on wednsday and thursday) and earned 27 mill the following weekend. Now granted, thats about 12% less of a drop off, but there was NO competition that weekend. Again, considering that Pirates came out the way it did, Superman should have had an even bigger dropoff than what it had. I understand you disagree, but just so you know, I stand by my theory that Superman will collect 200 mil domestic. And yes, I will most deffinitely mail you the check should I lose-I promise. Unless you prefer cash, that is.
-
Not as great as the first one, but not a bad movie, either. Certainly wasn't as huge a disappointment as Superman Returns. It did feel like they were trying too hard to fit in as many huge and spectacular action sequences as they could, rather than telling a cool ghost story, though. Still, pretty decent. Looking forward to the next one.
-
Would it be the Far East?
-
Yeah, I liked the first one a lot more, but the second one was still very good popcorn faire. What can I say--I'm pretty easy to please for films.
-
Batman Begins did more than "break even" as you stated. It was budgeted at 150 and broke 200 stateside. SR, ( that heaping pile of shit ) is budgeted at 260 and I doubt it will come close to that stateside. Don't fool yourself into thinking that SR will make serious buckage overseas- it won't. Why? Because other countries follow our lead, just like in the stock market. Unless Jackie Chan is in SR, it won't make shit overseas.
-
If you were a studio head and given what you know about merchandising and DVD sales, would you or would you not authorize a sequel? Oh, you may or may not fire singer and lower the budget, but would you authorize a sequel? Assuming the film breaks even at the box office and earns about 400 mil and sells batman sized dvds and keeping in mind the 1.3 or 1.4 billion dollars you've just earned from merchandising, would you authorize a sequel?
-
Anyway....where Pirates trumps Supes is in that Pirates was actually enjoyable. That scene on the island with the chest and the key getting tossed around was so light-hearted and fun that it took on an almost cartoon-like quality to it. For a film like this to do that and not go totally over the top and ruin it is quite a feat.
-
Actually, the film's budget was 200 mil--a bit less than pirate's. Of course, if you want to add on failed attempts at previous movies over ten years to the budget, fine, but i think thats a bit disingenuous, don't you? Batman Begins earned 200 stateside and only 150 or so for a grand total of 370 mil. And as we all know, studios only get half of box office receipts, so it only made a 30 mil profit--before dvd's. Again, it barely made a profit. No, Neal, Superman, as with nearly every blockbuster, will earn most of its profit through the video market and has already earned well above a billion in merchandising. End of story.
-
Also it won't make any money overseas because it just doesn't have any action in it. One Action scene won't sell many tickets to people who don't speak the language
-
Do you really believe that the real money draw for Revenge of the Sith was in its theatrical earnings? Oh, I'll grant you, it made a ton of cash based on its theatrical run. But when you factor in merchandising and dvd sales, Revenge of the sith probably earned George about 2 billion dollars--maybe more. Thats the kind of business hollywood is in, Neal.
-
Let me count the ways. 1) A long pointless detour into cannibal country, presumably only to set up a long pointless action sequence. 2) A villain who trumps the previous bad guy in the prosthetics and special effects department but comes no where near the tragic human element that Geoffrey Rush so effectively portrayed with the character Barbossa. 3) Endless
-
Maybe next time WB should pretend to make a movie and sell "a billion dollars" in merchandising and save us fans the grief of seeing a piece of shit flick for 2-1/2hours- in the meantime save themselves 260 million bucks.
-
there is no way that WB will not authorize a sequel, so long as it has good word of mouth and breaks even theatrically.
-
Superman cost more than 200 million? Where the hell did the money go? For one action scene? Come on. X2 cost 135 million and it looked like a Superstation movie and the Jean Grey fire effects were Xena caliber. Singer is good at copying everyone else. He is NOT a good action director. MI3 looked more expensive than X2 and it wasn't. Even fucking Freddy vs Jason looked like they spent more money on it than Singer did for X1. Pirates had a 150 dollar budget and you can see that the new Robert Zemeckis (Gore Verbinski) spent all of the money wisely. Why? Because he's just a good director who also has a good visual style. Maybe next time Warners needs to go hire someone who can allow the audience to have a good time. You cant fucking take Superman too seriously. It needs to entertain. And it also needs to not have soapy girly "Scandals" thrown into the plot (Superman's kid. Lois being abandoned.) Seriously. Give me entertainment. And Pirates 2 did just that. Also.... When the biggest buzz about your movie is the studio being concerned about the hero's wang being too big on screen, you know you got a fucking serious problem. They should have been concerned that they were making the cinematic equivalent to Ambien.
-
but dont pretend that WB didnt throw away 60 million or more at failed scripts because of some perceived theatrical profit margin. They wanted the vast amount of marketing revenue that they saw earned by Star Wars, Spiderman, and Lord of the Rings. Yes, they want a movie to be as big a hit as possible, but so long as the movie pays for itself and has good word of mouth, they'll keep making sequels to earn the marketing revenue. Just what the heck do you think Lucas lives off of throughout his entire life, charity donations?
-
Can we finally get an edit feature on here?
-
That idiot Singer spent 5 million bucks on the scene of Jor-el!!! Singer is spending Daddy's money on useless items. That scene would have worked if we focused on Lex's face and heard Jor-el's audio.
-
was flushed down the toilet in false starts before Singer ever came on board. That's money that was already written off. Essentially, that makes Singer's movie a $200 million effort. Having already made roughly $150 million, the movie will easily recoup it's production costs. Believe me, the suits at Warner's are already preparing to go back to the Superman well.
-
The guy completely mismanaged his budget. It took him six months to film his movie when it should have taken him a third of the time. He spent 5 mil on a jor-el effect that was fogged over so you couldnt see it. He spent 10 mil on a Krypton scene that was ultimately cut. SR shouldnt have costed any more than 170 or 180 mill to make (and Im being generous), and its very obvious that Singer really has no complete vision of a film. Yeah, he made the right decision, I think, to emuulate Donner and continue the previous franchise, but I think thats about it. In the next film, I swear by G-d that I better see some Darkseid or something similarly big. Yes, I would like to see a Supes/lois marriage and all, but i had better see some titanic battles.
-
I'm actually intrigued by the possible father/son relationship dynamic that will show up in future editions. Still, there had better be some supervillains involved. You hear me, WB? SUPER VILLAINS!!!!
-
oh lord....
-
in the theaters. Even tent pole productions like "Pirates". Want some really great insight into the financing of movies and how the world of hollywood works today? Read "The Big Picture: The New Logic of Money and Power in Hollywood" by Edward Jay Epstein. VERY interesting reading for movie buffs.
-
Period. A 58% drop is a disaster. It ain't gone hit $200 mil, Moon. As far as using toy revenue to justify sequels....have you gone mental????
-
If you were to believe these talkbacks you would think that Superman Returns was a great movie. But it was not. I never got hyped by any of the trailers for it and only saw the movie because my best friend's kid was dying to see Superman. He's 11. The little guy fell asleep midway, my friend fell asleep and woke up at the end confused, and the only thing that kept me awake was rage. I was mad that I was suckered into seeing something I KNEW would suck from day one. It was a waste of my time, and when Tom Cruise and his Witchcraft Powers make a better movie (MI3) than Super-Fucking-Man, you got problems. And reading that it cost so much to make I am astounded that it wasn't at least good. What a waste of money. People need to stop dick riding Singer. The man clearly doesn't give a shit about entertaining us when he has all his little devoted hypemen on websites endlessly pimping his mediocre bullshit. And I am not a huge fan of Spidey 1 and 2, but the teaser trailer for part 3 kicked ass and was better than the 2 and a half hours of glamour shots of Brandon Routh.
-
Sequels are hit or miss. Generally speaking- I don't beleive they make as much as the original, ( trilogies don't count). If SR is "breaking even" why would you take a huge risk on making a sequel? By the way -Stop excluding the 60 million bucks as if it isn't part of the budget. It is part of the budget and it has to be accounted for.
-
is EXACTLY why sequels are made. Thank you, Walt Disney.
-
It's obviously Deep's Capt Sparrow drives this series... but so many times during both films you find reasons to dispise and love each of the main characters. I started hating the sequel when they all turned on each other over who opens the chest, it just seemed so out of place and dumb. Tho I knew it was done to fuel a couple comedic situations, with a dumb purpose behind it just didn't make me give a shit. Then later she chains Sparrow to the Pearl in some cheep ass attempt to save their own asses. Only to transition into an ending that drives a third sequel plot that'll be full of contradictions saying... lets go save a hilarious cowardous douchebag who earlier tried to fuck us over for the chest for his own personal goals, one who hasn't addmited she left him to die but suddenly wants to find help everyone find him? On top of that bringing back a the first films C-grade villans... it was just dumb. This movie was no better than X3 to me. Entertaining, but still shit.
-
I don't think i'll ever forget the moment when I, and most other people, first found out how movies do business during the Batman lawsuit. Most people, myself included, sorta figured that whatever the box office said was what the film studios earned. I cant tell you how shocked I was when i first heard that Batman `89 actually didnt earn that much money from its theatrical release. Yeah, it made like 250 mill or so, but once the studio factored in its deals with Nicholson, Burton, and Prince, the film either broke even or was a loss (I actually think WB tried to say it was a loss). "So why do the movie, Warner Bros.?" we asked. Well, Warner Bros. earned well over a billion (not factoring inflation) dollars through merchandising, and nearly 200 million in rentals and pay-per-view accounts. The film was a monster despite only breaking even.
-
You fuckers are way too jaded and have zero idea of the talent that goes into all of the aspects of a movie like this.
-
Sure Supes will get a sequel, but the fute does look a bit brighter for the Owl and the Pussyc...er, Hammer. Going to see Pirates either Monday or Tuesday. Not really looking forward to it, but I got to see why everyone is so batshit crazy over this stuff.
-
Clearly Elizabeth is destined to become a Pirate. And what she did was payback to Jack for not being loyal when she risked her life to save his ass. I feel that she wont say what she did because it's essentially treason to go against the captain of your ship. Especially when he went back to help them. And now I like how going into the new movie Will doesn't fully know what and why she did what he saw her do (Kissing Jack). And she will act all different now because they are going to save a guy she set up to die, but then he'll think that she is acting like that because she is mourning the loss of Sparrow. The barbosa bit was a curveball. But it worked because people loudly reacted to it. I just hate when they film 2 movies back to back they dont immediately end it with a "To Be Concluded With" or show a trailer letting people know that the next one is coming soon. Studio's think all moviegoers are like us, people who visit "infotainment" websites, and know about movie release dates. Also my mom went to see Pirates with her friends and they all came home raving. It goes to show you why it made so much money, entertainment value and wide appeal. Eventhough I must say it pushed it's PG13 rating.
-
Think about it--pepsi payed George Lucas over a billion dollars just to stick star wars logos on their cans. And that was just for phantom menace. In superman returns you had product placement, credit card commercials, t shirts, books, magazines, soft drinks, potato chips. The hype for this movie approached damn near phantom menace levels of merchandising. Hell, it was so big it DWARFED Pirates of the Caribbean's promotional ads. Youre telling me that Warner Brothers wouldnt dip into the merchandising well a second time? I mean really!
-
I need a new fralling keyboard and mouse. *sigh*
-
Ok, that was my fault.
-
To get the opening weekend they got. I'm sure that they'll start merchandising more, at Disney themeparks. They have the biggest opening in history, why would they care about Sparrow on a Pepsi can, when you got a long ass line of eager kids dying to ride the Pirates ride, or buying Pirates stuff at Disney. They will continue to make money long after the trilogy has come to it's conclusion.
-
because they couldnt compete with the hype. What do you think happened, Mr. Profit? Disney just had a crystal ball that told them how much money the film would earn and so they didnt hype it? No, there was far more hype ont he internet, newspaper, and product market for SR than there was for Pirates. Oh sure, Pirates is indeed getting the last laugh, dont get me wrong. I'm simply saying that Superman's hype, which im sure had quite a bit to do with AOLTIMEWARNER being incharge of this film was a lot greater and the amount of merchandising easily doubled that of pirates. Thats all.
-
superman new weakness is pirates.
I did not see 130+million. I thought maybe 80 million -
The truth is I wasn't a fan of the 1st POTC but they really turned in a kickass trailer that had me pumped. I was pumped for SR for the obvious reasons, but DMC's trailer really got people interested in going
-
didnt need the merchandising? Please--disney is founded on merchandising. They didnt do it because their marketing numbers showed their wasnt as much of a demand for the stuff as their was for Superman. Of course, their results were obviously skewed, but dont make the mistake of thinking Disney wouldnt market a film out of some sense of artistic merit. This is Disney, after all--home of the direct-to-video.
-
this is going to drive disney stock price up tommorow.
-
but i really feel sad for the hard core supermna fans who keep coming up with scenarios which might lead to a superman sequel....i am not being sarcastic either...i feel sorry for them becasue no matter what you say the film is a total disaster for warners and if you think they are going to greenlight a sequel to a 260 million + dollar film which looks like it be lucky to cross 200 million domestic you are crazy. there will be no sequel. it bums me out too big time as i would love to see another one but it is time to face reality. superman returns is all we are going to get so make the most of it.
-
and I really need an edit function to correct my error ridden posts!!
-
some of you guys aren't saying that the theaters get a hugh cut of the box office. Maybe half and studios get the other half, or so. superman is going to need to make a more money.
-
I want to see darkseid, doomsday, or brainiac... the three villains most of us supes fans would love to see a movie adaption of with today's special effects. Their stories trump luthor's too. It's too bad singer didn't see it.
-
Wow...in three days, it outdid the boxoffice for SR both in terms of international and domestic. Warners, time to sac Jon Peters and reboot the franchise.
-
If they cut a sequel, chances are it will cost about the same if not more. Why? 1st things first, SR sucked because its lack of action scenes. Thye will need to spend serious money for serious action scenes. 2nd- Ken Wahl,er I mean Brandon Routh is going to demand more coinage as will that goon who played Lois Lane. Like idiots WB will pay them more. 3rd- lets face it, WB is going to have to hire a real screenwriter, not a couple of twenty somethings who write scripts in chalk. When its all said and done WB will be back at 260 million and at that point what the use? SP has been getting horrible word of mouth that it will be impossible to live out of its shadow.
-
Without a doubt. After the lackluster Friday, WB started running Superman trailers saying, "From the Direction of X-Men and X-Men 2". Trying to suck people in not on the merits of the visuals and the film, but on other (better) films.
-
LAST WEEKEND. This weekend it made 20 mil in the US alone, so lets say that it's hit the 200 mil mark worldwide as of today. Factor in that it may get to 230 before it's totally out of theaters, plus the DVD sales that will be ridiculously high, and the merchandising which has been fantastic for WB, there is a very, VERY good chance that a sequel will be greenlit. If not, thems the breaks, but there is no saying that this movie has been bad for Warner Brothers. They will at the very least break even. Though, having seen Superman Returns, I have to ask, What the fuck did they spend 260 million dollars on? I liked the film but I didn't think it was THAT packed with effects or anything.
-
Was from a decade of false starts for the project. That may factor into the decision to get it green lit, because it will at the very least hit 220 mil before it leaves theaters.
-
cause this half-likable flick had more fat then a lewinsky ass! what a depressing summer so far! Makes "Return of the King" look like Citizen Kane.
-
Had to be the long trailer for Spiderman 2. I don't think I've ever liked a trailer more. Fucking epic right there. Really sold the film well.
-
-- their merchandising makes BILLIONS. That is why there will be another Superman movie, young padwan.
-
Bingo. Batman '89 is a classic example. Studios no longer expect to make money at the box office -- it's all in the after-market. Sure, there are "artsy" films that studios put out just for prestige (i.e. Oscar shots. And to top it off, there's a lot of money made simply in the banking end of the business -- the financing along nets a boatload of dough.
-
I was utterly disappointed with the SNOOZE fest that was Superman Returns, the last 20 min. of MI:3 was dog shit, X-Men 3 was cool but felt claustrophobic at times and there was some B.S.....but this movie, I had SUCH high hopes for this movie and it was fucking A-Boring, B- the 'action' scenes were so unimpressive and boring C-wasn't enough action, too much emphasis on the comedy not enough on Davy Jones D-the time between the boring action was so useless. Sure it made a shit load of money, and I guess that's all that counts for most in the end, but I for one was not impressed with this crap...the 1st one was awesome and had great action beats...what happened to this?
-
It has a built in auduence, it would be cheaper to make, it would fuel sales of the season dvd sets, they've already introduced two other heroes somewhat successfully (Flash, and Cyborg, we won't mention fishguy) and Martian Manhuntere has been promised, as well as a possible Green Arrow appearance. (Although one would wonder if Arrow has replaced Manhunter.) All of that could easily lead to a Justice League storyline. There are so many possibilities they could go with. I admit I would like to see where the kid storyline would go in the current film, but Smallville would be a much safer, and possibly lucritive venture for Warner Bros. Who knows what will happen. They won't let Superman die, thats for sure. They've got options.
-
THANK YOU! Everything after "ten" was awful. Tom's wife should have been killed by Hoffman. They shouldn't have reused that tired mask gimmick, or the badguy being a IMF member onec again. Everything up to that was great. It didn't have the style of the first, but it was probably the most audience friendly, even though there wasn't much of a audience for it. P.S. THE KID IS ADOPTED, KATIE WASN'T PREGNANT!!!
-
I know because the masses LOVED the film film it likely wasn't a concern, but why is a light and fun franchise about Pirates have to be 2 and a half hours for each film? That was the one problem with the first, and they didn't correct it.
-
ha ha ha
-
Im just very opinionated and possess a winning personality. It helps to be a geneous, too. Wait--how's that spelled?
-
the friggin lotr was 3+ hrs but enjoyable compare to superman returns.
-
Sir Michael Caine - "...Christopher Nolan who directed Batman is doing a smaller film called The Prestige about magicians and it
-
...Pirates is a mega-blockbuster, to be sure. And a blockbuster trilogy at that. Much in the vein of Raiders. But it remains to be seen whether it's an ongoing franchise. Radiers didn't make that grade, whereas star wars did, because it was not dependent on any actors from the first three. Pirates could certainly do future films based on the original concept, because we can like more pirates that jack sparrow. for instance Loved seeing geoffrey rush reappear. But not sure he or anyone else will ever catch lightning in a thimhle the way jack sparrow has. Great character, but will there every be another person we'll be willing to see in that role? Or as the child of Jack and Elizabeth? Doubtful at best. There is no Indiana Jones without Ford, no little tramp without chaplin, no Neo without Reeves. And no Jack Sparrow without Depp. SO, great as the char is he's probably not gonna make the status of an evergreen. So, despite Pirates being a much more fun movie than Superman that was also much better marketed (notwithstanding the bizarre comments here that Disney didn't overhype the movie; whomever said that wasn't watching any TV shows aimed at kids. Superman wasn't as good as pirates but he remains an evergreen. They'll make money on this and their investment in keeping the character going will be well worth it. If they're upset at WB it's not that the film didn't make money or wasn't worth it. It was by a long shot. They may be upset that it could've made more, a lot more (and they'd be right), but don't forget these are the people who watched helplessley as a multi-billion dollar character (Batman) nearly fell off the edge of the earth. But he survived and he, like Superman, remains something even Jack Sparrow is not -- an evergreen.
-
LoL, Shermdawg it's true! Tom's wifey was a fucking expert marksman action hero out of NOWHERE, Tom's head should have exploded after the first fucking 1/2 hr. where that device was 'activiated', Hoffman was....sigh, RUN OVER BY A FUCKING CAR! What kind of goddamn lackluster death is that?!? Fucking weak man! And we still don't really know what that 'super weapon' does, he just takes off in such a corny half assed ending!
-
Probably just an awkward way of saying that the next one has the Joker in it. I still maintain it will be called Batman Continues...
-
Jul 09, 2006 8:12:16 PM CDT
WOW moviemack, hit the nail on the head with Superman!
by roobins froobins
Everything you said summed up EXACTLY how I felt about that overrated anal discharge of a movie. Fucking brutal! I mean we wait how many years? And we get a boring fucking bald ass villain, bullshit plot and everything taken from the original movies...what about giving a slight 'nod' to the originals instead of making the goddamn movie a complete and utterly boring retread with NO fucking action!
That scene where he stops the robbers cuts out at what could have been potentially a really cool action scene...fucking garbage man. Superman Returns was a Super-piece of shit! -
it will have been 20 years since the last time Joker was put to screen? My, how time flies. I dont envy the man who gets casted as the Joker, either, because Nicholson, though old and fat, gave one hell of a memorable performance.
-
Actually not revealing what the weapon, or whatever it was, was freaking genius. It would have just been the same old shit from every other spy flick.
-
cinematagrophy: awesome... great (moody) lighting and lush colors, production design and costume: perfect, sfx: remarkable, locations: great and they kept on coming, story: convoluted and illogical... i wanted to love this movie so much... now i'm left with the (matrixesque) hope that part 3 will put everything into sharp focus... it didn't help that i was wedged between some little kid who talked through the whole movie and the most annoying lady on planet earth (who kept snapping her gum and asking my wife questions about the first movie every few minutes or so)... i'll see again hoping for a less disctracted and more sensicle viewing... at any rate, it was a heck of a ride!
-
is a bunch of whining twats bashing Superman Returns and worrying about how much money a multi-national conglomerate like TimeWarner is making.
-
in the SR theater. Everyone is over at POTC2, brokeback.
-
That movie was great, because Depp was great! Captain Jack was even cooler and more off the wall in this one than he was in the first. I can't wait for the third.
-
I adored POTC2, but there are some reasonable criticisms being leveled at the movie that I can at least understand -- the movie's a little fatty and could use another edit, the story meanders too much, key plot points are told in short bursts of wordy exposition crammed between loud action sequences. All that's fine and dandy and understandable, but here's the thing -- THOSE EXACT SAME CRITICISMS CAN APPLY TO THE FIRST FILM JUST AS EASILY. If the POTC movies are not your particular cup of cinematic tea, fine. Go watch something else. But to criticize this movie as somehow being vastly inferior to the first film is ridiculous. Some of the freshness may be gone (as happens with all sequels), but this is as creative and wonderful and FUN a POTC sequel as could be hoped for. Can't wait for The Return of Barbossa.
-
this film seems to get a collective - "oh - it was average" reaction from people over 13 and under 30. At least SR TB's had the fanboys at eachother's throats! ARRRRRRRRGH!
-
Like I said earlier, it appears to have the most front-loaded BO in history. It had a 20% drop on Saturday, to be followed by almost another 30% drop on Sunday, whereas Superman Returns picked up a 15% increase. By this time next Sunday, Disney execs will be shaking their heads wondering "WTF?"
-
Let's see how polarizing this TB can get *now*. :)
-
I was laughing my ass off then, and I'm laughing my ass of now thinking about WB's kneejerk marketing reaction after the first couple of days that Supes wasn't making any money. Running those ad's proclaiming "from the director of X-Men and X-Men 2" was a really, really sad move by WB. All those months had gone by with them just calling it a "Bryan Singer movie" or simply Superman Returns, and all that other jazz. They ran commercials featuring radioSHAQ on sports networks and other bullshit. Then it only makes $85 million in 5 days and its's OMG, the movie is bombing, our best chance to make money is to run commercials saying, hey everyone this is from the director of the first two X-Men movies. (Fuck WB, Fuck Bryan Singer, Fuck, and Fuck his two writers, your's truly, Tom Rothman) ;)-------------moviemack, Fucking perfect description of why Superman Returns is utter crap. PS: I did like the Lois & Clark TV show, but didn't think anybody would be foolish enough to make a $260 HOLLYWOOD movie that isn't even as good as the 5-6 season run of that show.
-
It's a huge hit! No drop off. Even when the naysaying hating mofos get beat. they still try to find ways to bring the party down. fuckin hilarious!
-
I watched POTC1 a week ago, and in comparing the two, I was surprised at the tight editing and pacing in the first and the noticable difference in POTC2. It seemed rushed, but I don't know anything about when the film was finished, if there were reshoots, etc. That's how it came off to me, though.
-
Or was it just me?
-
Their dicks get hard when a blockbuster flops. the bigger the money to make. the hype and the love from talkbackers = resulting a flop. the hornier the haters get, haha! hahaha warner execs are crying right now! yes! disney is hurting! God i love it! PJ's movie flopped! omg! i'm gonna cum! lucas bombed? yes! yes! yes! harder! harder! harder! (PAUSE -don't mind me folks. I'm insane) - harder! harder! harder! hollywood is going to hell. my dream is coming true. no one will ever be happy about a movie in a talkback again! MUAHAHAHA!
-
Superman returns was far from polarizing, after the shuttle rescue that movie went down the toilet fast. It was mind-numbling dull. POTC2 smashed it in three days.
-
Oh it is polarizing because you are still posting about it now. That's the point. ARRRRRRGH. I'm out of here to go eat some all you can eat seafood at Sizzler.
-
i feel people have come down way to hard on superman returns. i feel it was very well made and singer definitely did have a passion he just didn't hit the mark most people were looking for. romance is nice when handled correctly, but the action sequences just didn't match up. i feel they tried to go to much the spider-man route, with a character that just wasn't meant to go that route. superman needs to be facing powerful villains in epic battles primarily with a little love story sprinkled throughout. i never really expected it to come close to pirates. it was the ridiculous budget that made people believe that it should, when in fact i always felt it would do around batman begins numbers. pirates is currently one of the hottest properties in hollywood with ridiculous momentum and mass appeal on it's side vs. a revival of a character that has't had any real success on screen since 1980. it was a trial and error thing with superman and hopefully next time they will make a movie more in tune with what today's audiences want. but it is far from a bomb and after worldwide and dvd sales i am sure it will make some profit, even if it is a small one. like i said before though 2007 the real battle begins when the three hottest properties today all go head to head to head in one summer.
-
Stay on topic. Geez, click on a POTC2 link and get hit with tons of crap about Superman. Who gives a shit? Post in the Superman thread.
-
"cant we all just be happy together? happy and gay?" sniff sniff..
-
absolutely ruined by the filmakers' lack of self restraint. There's about 10 minutes of garbage material littering the film that drag the whole thing down. Bullet-time, squid snot, CG pole-bouncing acrobatics, unneccessary LOTR-style CG flyovers, sidekick commentaries, rotating triple-barreled cannons (the worst offender)... the list goes on and on. There was clearly a brilliant script in there - and there's even enough material to make a perfect movie... but I can just see a bunch of CG animators sitting around a conference table geeking out on stupid ideas that somehow made it into the final product. Tack on a Lost in Space style ending and you get a movie with 10/10 potential but 5/10 as delivered.
-
This is officially the best talkback ever.
-
I think we're all discussing Superman because its a far more interesting topic than Pirates. Pirates is a hit film with an uneven pace, thin plot, and pretty nifty characters. The fun thing to do is compare the two movies and bitch, bitch, bitch.
-
You just don't understand the business and the studio system if you think there will be no Superman Returns sequel. There will be. Superman is a franchise and studios NEED that revenue. In the end, Superman Returns will make a very good profit. If it doesn't garner $200 million domestic, it certainly will go above that worldwide. One it debuts on DVD, it'll garner another $250-300 million on top of the $200-some million world wide. People that didn't see it in the theater are waiting for DVD. That's how the business is now. DVD is the key and Warners knows that despite the lack of Spider-Man-like numbers, Superman is a revived franchise. They may learn a bit from this one; Making it 2 hours rather than 2.5, More action, etc. But this movie did not kill the chance for multiple sequels. Slow down, take a breath, and think logically. Letting personal viewpoints of the film dictate the facts of the business just looks ignorant.
-
Superman invading the X3 tb's, or 24 invading the Lost tb's, or Family Guy invading the South Park tb's, or Hidden Faces invading the Spidey 3 tb's... Show me one major talkback where the topic hasn't veered offcourse, and I shall be impressed. It's the nature of the beast.
-
You can't count the $60 million in development over the last ten years. Each year, studios take the hit and costs like that are written off at the end of the fiscal year. I know the media LOVES to put those numbers together because it makes a story, but those costs shouldn't be connected so close to the finished product that was Bryan Singer's Superman Returns. So, they worldwide gross will garner above the budget, and then add DVD and you have well over $100 million dollars in profit after TV sales, theater percentages, producer points, actor points etc. And yes, merchandising as well.
-
"I think we're all discussing Superman because its a far more interesting topic than Pirates"
No, you're all discussin Superman because you're a bunch of comic book nerds who can't discuss anything else. -
What can I say? I prefer wrapping a blanket around my neck and my underwear over my jeans. Beats the heck out of wearing a bandanna and drinking myself into a stupor.
-
First, how was the Pirates plot incomprehensible? It seemed pretty clear-cut to me and I watched it while wrangling a couple kids at a for God's Sakes drive-in. And the complaints about the film not providing reasons for some of the magical stuff descends to the level of "so why exactly can Gandalf do magic" or "why doesn't Spiderman shoot his webs out his ass". Don't worry, you'll get your midichlorians next time. Hope they make you every bit as happy as they did in the Star Wars movies. Swann and Norrington both showed crucial character development and Knightley didn't entirely suck this time. The flaws are exactly the same as in the first film, and on that it can be faulted and I do certainly do so. It is flabby and repetitive and although as a long time pirate movie fan (just look at my talkback name) I could appreciate the pirates going to a cannibal village (and for that matter hitting in the two movies so far nearly every classic pirate movie bit) unless there is a surprise involving it in the third movie they should have made it mean more. The first film did exactly this sort of thing, too. This Pirates set the plate for the third movie to bring home real three film archs for several of the characters that are both interesting and intricate, by the limited standards of a big summer franchise, there were plenty of fun moments, and it was great seeing Depp doing his thing. It also had you checking your watch a few times. It worked, just like the first one. Do wish someone would explain to Herdywood that just as it was wrong to try to make every movie, regardless of scope or content, never crack the two hour mark in the seventies, it is perfectly permissible to make a movie shorter than two and a half hours if the material doesn't demand it now.
-
I think the answer is that Both Capt Sparrow and Bootstrap were spared the curse of the blakc pearl because they were removed from the ship before the wealth had been spent, thus igniting the curse. The plot of the first movie was to retrieve the trasure and make it whole again to lift the curse but since the treasure was whole when jack was sent off via mutiny and bootstrap was tied to a cannon presumably for speaking against barbossa's (sp??) mutiny that neither were then cursed because the curse had not been set in yet. I think i said the same thing twice accidently but feel too lazy to go back and edit.
-
First, that line should be the name of something. Second, Michael Moriarity and David Carradine handled an Aztec God, so they can't be all that tough.
-
Not that that's something special--my old drill instructer could kick an aztec god's ass any day of the week and twice on sundays. Hell, who hasn't beaten up an aztec god or two and stolen their milk money? Heck, where do you think all that gold came from? Aztec Gods are the AICN nerds of the supernatural. "Oooooh, I curse you with imortality! Its so scary to live forever and do what you want!" Goddamn Aztec pussies...
-
I mean, come on! All it took was one spaniard with a sinus cold to wipe out their entire civilization! How tough can their gods be?
-
Well, even though I am a geek and I've been coming to this site since its inception to learn the inside story on movies film and television, and even though I work for a major studio and just thought I'd weigh in on this talk back regarding POTC 2. First, let me say that I won't even go near the debate comparing one film franchise to another. Frankly, a film is like any other work of art. There are moments and parts that move you and others that you scratch your head and say, "What the F*#$ was the artist thinking?". In Supe Returns I found the effects wonderful especially the flying. In my own night dreams I fly in the effortless manner as the man of Steel. A lifting from the core of the being to weightlessness. This was beautifully captured in Supe and I was moved each time we were treated to 'lift off'. That said the casting was uneven, Lois Lane lacked character focus, sh%t she lacked a character at all. Plot, was a derivative work of the Superman the Original. But, I visited my local multiplex opening night of Supe and besides my partner, there were only 15 people in the audience. That's right, 15 people on a Friday night opening night. True as pointed out by others, it was the July 4th holiday, still. The audience was the Dead Zone. We went to POTC 2 opening night at the same multiplex Friday night. I'd purchased the tickets earlier in the day and was glad I did because when I walked up to the Box Office a large hand made sign back of the bullet proof glass advised me that the 3 prior film showings were sold out. We entered the theater 15 minutes before show time and COULDN'T FIND TWO SEATS TOGETHER! It was that packed. A good sign this franchise has legs. Now, to the film. I'm going to describe this film differently than others have reported here I'm going to talk about it in terms of the audience reaction. I believe that the reason people still pay $14 a ticket to sit in an auditorium with hundreds of strangers they wouldn't look in the eye at a bus stop is because we all want to go into the cave and share with the tribe the magic. That's all. It's an experience we are compelled to repeat from hundreds of thousands of years of evolution. We crave our shamen and our mystical experience. Whether it's a concert experience or a film, we all want to be in the dark and share the mystery. The audience was eager EAGER for the film to start, on the edge of their seats eager. And Johnny Depp owns this film every time he's on the screen. From his 'resurrection' in the floating coffin, where the audience couldn't see him and yet broke into peals of laughter when he dispatches the bird they wanted their Jack Sparrow. The other scene stealer is the Davy Jones character. The octopus appliance is so realistic and CGI so smooth that I found myself watching his face like a cobra gazing at a snake charmer. Awesome work. In fact all the characters pressed into D. Jones crew in their various stages of 'decomposition' 'incorporation'into the ship were engaging. Will Turner has little or nothing to do but search for his beloved Kiera. And Kiera is about 20 lbs. lighter than the first film, infinitely less feminine but definitely a more active character than before. The part that blew my mind and held the audience in full stop was the kiss. Up until that moment the audience, which was greatly mixed, families with kids, couples, singles was laughing and rolling right along with the roller coaster of the advancing plot. Then the kiss. Spoiler alert here. Depp ditches the Pearl at the beginning of the Krackon attack and returns in time to save the heroine. She in term sexually aggressives on him pinning him to a mast kisses him and handcuffs him to the ship so she can escape with Will and co. in a long boat. The audience was absolutely breathless during the kiss. Silenced, focussed the tension was palpable. For those who saw the movie, when Depp says "Pirate" my audience collectively moaned. Haven't shared this intimate experience with 300 people in the dark in a long time and this made the film worth it's weight in gold. I'll certainly buy this DVD when it comes out, but I'll never again experience 300 breathless strangers on the edge of their seats trying to figure out what the f&ck just happened when Knightly corners Depp. It's left field in a wonderful way. My only recommendation is see this film in a crowded theater. Suspend belief and let the shamen take the tribe on a wonderful journey in the dark.
-
All action - confusing, mindnumbing plot - 30 minutes into the movie and I'm sleeping. Nothing to hang on to. This film was BAD. Amazing effects and amazingly shot, but it was one sight gag after another. Depp and Davey Jones effects are the only reason to watch this. But it sets up a good sequel somehow. Congrats on the opening Disney. Hire less cooks for the script kitchen next time.
-
Jul 10, 2006 12:02:54 AM CDT
"Anyone else get hungry looking at Davy Jones' face?"
by mattmanreturns
I actually got hungry when the Kraken's tentacles got scorched, and there's some charred pieces on the deck. Had the Kraken given up its attack, that would've been some fine dining.
-
Not sure why Keira is getting so much crap on this board; she was good in the first one, and she's terrific here. It appears to me that her character is developing along the lines of Anne Bonny, the most famous nonfictional female pirate, who just happened to be married to a pirate captain named Jack ("Calico Jack" Rackham). Yes, yes, I know she supposedly kissed Sparrow just to trick him into being handcuffed; but you gotta admit there's significant chemistry there: that was a fuck-you-right-on-the-deck-of-this-ship kiss. Will Turner is just too damned nice; Elizabeth won't settle for him. Mark well me words, mateys: Lizzie hooks up with Cap'n Jack at the end of part 3!!!
-
at the box office there will not be a sequel. yes studios rely on films like this for their main revenue. But only when they hit. This film has been a miss. this is disastrous for warners especially coming so soon after another disaster poseidon warners would have been looking to this film to help off set some of the damage from that stinker....And all the people who claim you can't count the 60 million spent developing over the years...thats fine for us to say but i bet you anything the warners accountants are singing a different tune. And what about these new ads OI keep seeing...the desperate ads to sell it on the action ...do you think those come free??if warners break even in this film and even that looks unlikely do you seriously think someone is going to greenlight a sequel based on merchandise sales??? not on a film which cost this much....if they break even or if a miracle occurs and they happen to make a tiny profit they won;t be thinking sequel they will be thinking thank fuck that was lucky. they won;t be able to make a sequle for less involving the same talent that made this one....plus this one had hardly any action in it at all and they still spent 200 million on production...I personally couldn't see where it all went....watch deads man chest..every penny up on screen....if this film hadnt have been so astronomically expensive then your theory would probably hold but when a film cost this much and performs so badly you are naive to think a sequel will be coming any time soon......do you honestly think there is an executive at warners right now who has the balls to bring up sequel plans in the board room????
-
Will be The Wayan Bros. Little Man because it's the second in their trilogy of comedic genious, with the first being White Chicks.
-
Good points. I see your argument. But work in a studio system. There's more at play than anything we've talked about. Accountants sweated out the $60 million over a span of the few years in development. Sure, it would have been nice to garner that sixty back for smiles and profit, but in the end, that $60 million has been accounted for regarding the studio. In the long long run, yes, it was a loss, but not due to the direct underperformance of the final product. Blame the various executives at the time, the talent attached (writers and directors that got the boot), etc. Regarding making money back. Superman Returns IS NOT the success Warners were dreaming of. No. But, it WILL turn a profit. Let's say the film makes only $200 million world wide. Like I said before, TV sales will give it some more however DVD will be the BIG payoff, garnering at the very least $250 million. So now we have $450 million give or take. Forget merchandising all together. Take off advertising at say $50 million (estimate). That's $400 million. Take points given to Spacey, Singer, Peters, etc. Take out theater percentage and other various costs and at the VERY LEAST you have $100 million in profit. DVD is the key. It's a whole new ball game now that peope are saying, "Fuck, I'm not standing in line for overpriced popcorn and soda, sitting next to a bunch of strangers, kids, etc. that talk during the movie when I can wait three months and watch it on my own TV." THAT is why DVD sales are so high right now. Sucks. But the profit is there. Now it's true, Warners have to look at what they did wrong in order to make a sequel much more of a box office beast, yes. But there will be a sequel. It will happen within the next three years. And hopefully, it will be the film WE ALL wanted.
-
Well said. People forget the magic of cinema. AICN focuses so much on the small details, that they forget to let go, open their minds, and ENJOY. Every great movie has shitty moments, bad twists, bad acting, bad characters, bad script choices, or whatever.
-
I wasn't a huge fan of the first one. Thought it was ok. However, the trailer for DMC was amazing and really got me excited to see the sequal. DMC was really good. The first half and hour or so was pretty boring though. I was about to turn to my friend and say "We have another Superman Returns on our hands" but luckily Jack got stuck on the island of carnivoruis inhabitants. Once that scene started the movie hit its stride and never looked back. The CGI was amazing but not in the "Holy Crap, look at that CGI" sort of way. It was afterwards when my friends and I were talking about the Flying Dutchmen and the crew and how they were so amazing and that was when were started saying how great the CGI was. ILM KICKS THE SHIT OUT OF WETA. PERIOD. Can't wait for the third one though. And if there is a Superman Returns sequal, I hope to god that Singer isn't the director, or at least have the Warner Brother Suits have some control of the story. BATMAN BEGINS 2 WILL OWN ALL.
-
Well, Keira was kissing Johnny Depp at the time. That probably wasn't acting, haha.
-
......you assume that the SR DVD's are going to sell like hotcakes, in order to generate the necessary profit to cover the shortfall from the theatrical-run underperfomance. That's not automatic nor is it a given, by any means. Especially when you consider the fact that the word-of-mouth factor is just as significant when it comes to DVD sales as it is in Theatres if not more so. In fact, is anything I would speculate that the only way they sell the DVDs convincingly is if they piggyback its DVD-release onto a box-set with Donner's original movies and a special ed. director's cut, with a sort of Christopher Reeve dedication edition and pin all your hopes on the nostalgia factor. As opposed to, anything to do with the strengths ( or glaring lack of) of Singer's film. And now, given the ceaseless haemorraghing at the B.O., they have no other choice but to go this route and probably do it as early as possible ( think early christmas release). I really really wouldn't expect a sequel anytime soon, unless this thing becomes a cult DVD hit, chances of which, right now, are very very low......
-
I think those of you who said that DMC had no plot just didn't get it. Did you just not pay attention? There was fucking loads of plot in this movie, with each character having their own motivations and goals, sometimes overlapping, sometimes coming into conflict with one another. These are really fun, well done characters with alot of shit going on. So much was going on, it had to be stretched to another film for christ's sake! Plus, I felt that the characters from the first one fit in well in this one, to the point where it felt like a natural continuation more than a "hey lets just bring everyone back for the hell of it" move. I'm not saying the film is the best movie ever, but the story is absolutely there for those paying attention.
-
...because it is Superman. WB has more to lose, in terms of image, in not releasing another Supes movie. Superman is WB's flagship franshise; they own the most iconic American character. It'll look bad if they don't keep it going now that they finally got the ball rolling. Especially once Batman Begins 2 comes out. Maybe SR didn't have a $132 Mil opening, but it's not going to lose money. The next one will most likley be much different then this one, but there'll be another one. They'll keep it going atleast until they can do a cross-over with Bats. I just hope they develope Clark Kent much more as a real person.
-
I havn't seen POTC2 yet, but the $132 Mil made me think of how that leaves Supes, which prompted the last post. PS: Everytbody keeps talking about 'DMC'. Are they maing a Delorean movie?
-
1) "A long pointless detour into cannibal country, presumably only to set up a long pointless action sequence." 1) I don't understand this gripe at all. Had Captain Jack been easy to find, a) the east india trading company would have had him already, and b) it would have been kind of lame... oh looking for me? here I am! The whole point of the island sequence was to find and retrieve Jack Sparrow. It had a point and purpose. 2) "A villain who trumps the previous bad guy in the prosthetics and special effects department but comes no where near the tragic human element that Geoffrey Rush so effectively portrayed with the character Barbossa." 2) Davy Jones has been cursed far longer than Barbossa was, he's not even human anymore. As a creature he's fantastic and his backstory has a great myth element to it. Plus, not all villains need to be tragic human characters... Sometimes they can just be villains and that's alright. Even so he did have a sort of tragic backstory, even if it hasn't been fully explained yet. 3) "Endless
-
Had a big smile on my face the whole time and cant wwait till the next one. Does anyone listen to rottentomatoes.com anymore. how wrong did those guys get it. 50% or something like that with lots of negative reviews and yet its seems to be diong very very well.
-
I guess you just need to know the business. Not that I'm the all knowing or anything. WB knows the DVD will sell. Take recent numbers, "Failure to Launch" generated nearly $35 million in combined sellthrough and rental revenue its first week in stores. $35 Million in five days. This lackluster modest hit garnered that in five days in DVD sales and rentals. If you follow the numbers (read the Hollywood Reporter from time to time), you'd see that it is a give in that a franchise tentpole will make almost equal to or more than its domestic box office take. Movies like "Hellboy" which underperformed at the Box Office, garnered huge profits because of DVD. When you have any major title like Superman, Batman, Spider-Man, and then into War of the Worlds, MI:3, or whatever studio tentpole you are looking at, they will garner at the VERY VERY least, $100 million. Usually for big films like these, $200 million, whether they are great movies or not. It's all in the numbers. Superman Returns will probably make more in DVD sales than in Box Office. It's not "I think it will." It's, "It will." You can say it is speculative until it actually happens, but that's like saying we don't know that Pirates will make $200 million at the Box Office because it hasn't happened yet. We know it's going to make more than $200 million. Barring any nuclear bomb that ends the world before it does. It WILL make that much and more. As will Superman Returns with DVD sales. You can't argue it. Okay, i'm talking about this too much....
-
i'm planning to see it this wednesday. As for Superman Returns, it was ironic that the only 'emotional' scene was the opening title with William's theme. There might not even be another sequel, not just for Superman, also for Batman and possible movies of Wonder Woman, Flash, Green Lantern, Aquaman and the rest of DC's superheroes character
-
DVD sales are huge for even the most mondane movie. Superman Returns will probably net at least $150 million in DVD sales in a few months after release. Couple with that a $300 million worldwide haul at the BO and you got yourself set up for at least 1 more Superman movie. Back to Pirates, I have a question, was Davy Jones 100% CGI? I thought the whole crew, including DJ were all 100% motion capture CGI.
-
shit.... ive see it twice already.
I still enjoyed it the second time.
some people bitch too much.
I wonder how many complaints people would have if there were a second coming.
"OMG! Jesus was SO out of character coming in with that flaming sword... umm they did that in Star Wars!... so derivative" -
Why wouldn't there be a Batman sequel? Begins was clearly a successful movie. Good BO, Good DVD sales, Good reviews. More importantly, great movie.
-
Batman was good, but it looks like WB is waiting to see how SR would perform at the box office then decide what to do with their properties, including sequels for Batman. Spider-Man's sequels were moving fast, picked up and developed right after the previous ones. Maybe WB would consider to limit their budgets for upcoming movies and this could mean bad news...
-
Why would WB let Superman Returns hurt both the Superman franchise and the Batman franchise when clearly Supreman Returns only hurt the Superman franchise. I do understand what you are talking about but it seems like a bad business action. Plus, the sequal to Begins wasn't to start filming until this fall/winter so it might seem like WB is waiting to see what Returns does at the BO but actually they have already stated when production was suppose to start on Begins 2.
-
.......and a whole lot of hot air to go with it. And the fact that you keep claiming to "know the business" any more than the rest of us (who incidentally also happen to actually read 'Hollywood Reporter from time to time'; thanks for the needlessly condescending and ultimately pointless and desperate reference) doesn't make it any less so. And no its not a given that tentpoles make almost equal to or more than its domestic Box office release. Case in point: King Kong which didn't ( or rather still hasn't - and is incidentally the other over-hyped and ultimately infamous under-perfomer at the B.O. - surprise, surprise); like I told you before, don't discount the lingering effects of bad-word-of-mouth on a movie's DVD sales and perfomance. And the example you give of Hellboy, is what I referred to as a 'cult' DVD hit, in the sense that it garnered more buzz from its DVD release than it did prior to or during its theatrical run, where the marketing was decidedly skewed towards the geek/comicbook crowd. Ditto Sin City. And as for the other examples you brought up (Batman, Spider-Man, and then into War of the Worlds, MI:3,) those were essentially hits, at the Box office, or at least didn't underperfom to the extent that SR currently is; and as such it shouldn't be a surprise that their DVD sales were just as impressive or decent enough after release. Ultimately bad bad bad examples to compare to SR, seeing as they pretty much matched and exceeded their expectations going in. Further to which, the other example you gave, Hellboy, didn't have nearly the same degree of expectations, - and need I say production budget and costs- as Superman Returns did. So once again the fact that it garnered huge profits at the DVD counter, is hardly comparable to SR, and another example of bad analogy usage at its finest. Maybe you should put down the Hollywood Reporter, and pick up a few a BOOK on making (or specifically, avoiding) fallacious arguments which use faulty analogies in trying to drive home your weak and invalid point. If in the highly unlikely scenario, that Superman Returns will make more in DVD sales than at the theatres, then like I already intimated, that will only be as a result of sales gimmicks used by WB ( such as the bundling Donner's movies into a gift set), as opposed to the fact that people actually want to own this movie. And even then, considering just how much the movie is struggling at the B.O. ( like the fact that it's having trble getting to $200 mill. domestically) , the fact that its theatrical take might be exceeded by DVD sales is not saying much. 2 last points:- You once again, make a plethora of assumptions in your arguments, such as dismissing the fact that Superman Returns will be competing at the DVD sales counter with the very same movies that are kicking its ass at the theatres as we speak . Disney will also be eager to have a DVD release of POTC by christmas or at least early enough to beat the sequel next year, and then there's a whole other bunch of blockbusters that were already released earlier this year (MI3, Da Vinci, Cars, X3 etc), which will also probably have DVD releases out at the same time and ultimately eat into SR DVD sales, as well. Lastly, you also assume , or rather dismiss, the rather sizable martketing costs that this movie has thus far incurred on WB pockets, marketing costs that werenot factored into the quoted $204 or $260 million production costs that the studio has thus far confirmed. During the last fortnight, particularly after they saw the seriously underperforming first week, WB considerably stepped up their marketing campaign in attempt to bosst up the buzz for the movie - an ultimately futile course of action, and one that still doesn't even factor just how much they had already poured into marketing prior to its release. And let's not forget the fact that so far, the movie is performing even worse overseas than it is domestically ( $30 million over 2 weeks); the reverse situation of what happened with the other examples of movies you gave, save for Batman Begins which also underperformed overseas - must be something messed up in that WB overseas marketing campaign. There's a good reasonwhy you've heard hardly a peep from any WB suits regarding a sequel, despite the fact that most blockbusters usually have their sequels announced by the respective studio barely a week after its release - it would seem that those suits don't have as much faith in those 'sure-fire' DVD sales numbers as you do. But do go ahead an keep deluding yourself that this movie is going to make it all better at DVD sales, and enough to justify a sequel or whatever the hell else you Superman fans are deluding yourselves into believing now. First it was that it would own the Summer Box office and do "Spidey-like" numbers (courtesy of Massawyrm); I said it wouldn't and guess what? it didn't. Then, expectations were lowered somewhat, amd it was that it would do LOTR numbers ( again Massawyrm's words of wisdom); I said it wouldn't and guess what again? it didn't. And then after it opened poorly it became a case of "it has 'good legs' and will have a strong run at the B.O. thanks to good-word-of-mouth",; and once again, yep you guess it, it seems like it's refusing to conform to fanboy delusions. Now I guess the company line is that it will make up its profists in DVD sales. And the beat goes on........Keep. Deluding. Yourself.
-
Enough with the CGI!!!
-
"When DJ found Bootstrap, BS was still under the effects of the Aztec curse. DJ BROKE the undead curse on BS, and RECURSED him into an immortal barnacle man. Anyone else find that interesting???" ----- We don't actually know Jones broke the Aztec Curse, though - he could have just pulled Bill out of the crushing black depths and installed him on the Dutchman as Barnacle Man, then the Curse was broken later. So far a while there he was Twice-Cursed Rotting Skeleton Barnacle Man (with extra Starfish), which is something you don't see every day.
-
Were they all 100% motion capture CGI or were there prosthetics? My friends and I had an argument over this. I thought it was 100% MC CGI he said there were some prosthetics.
-
You gave me some head before you left. If your going to tell the story...tell it right.
-
...was, of course, Roman Polański's "Pirates". And I'd much rather give its DVD another spin today than await a sequel to the mediocrity spawned by someone responsible for "Mouse Hunt".
-
I'm singling you out Kai, because you posted on this last, but it's a question to the lot of you who are so certain that SR's a bomb that'll never produce a sequel. (Bear in mind this is NOT a counter-argument, really, because who am I to argue with the extensive insider knowledge possessed by repeat AICN talkbackers? It's just a question.) Why is it SOOOO important that "studio suits" - btw, how many studio meetings are you attending, anyways? - are "talking sequel" now? Yeah, Spidey and X sequels were planning immediately after their "big weekends" (personally, I feel that MARVEL properties are little more than fucking cash cows in the minds of the studios, whereas WB actually wants their properties to LAST - because they OWN them - so they actually think things through instead of just throwing up whatever, oh, say, RATNER can scramble together before the next summer) ... yet, everyone here seems SOOOO certain as well that a Batman sequel is coming. WHERE? Where is it? Is there a script? Has anyone new been cast? Is there anything more than fanboy rumors and rambling? Not that I've seen. AND IT'S BEEN A YEAR NOW SINCE THE FIRST CAME OUT! As far as I can tell from these talkbacks ... (1) SR sucks and there won't be a sequel because, well, because we say so. (2) Batman Begins was great and there will be a sequel because, well, because we say so. (3) SR won't make back the money in merchandising because, well, because we say so ... and that won't matter anyways, because there's no Hulk 2 and, um, something about King Kong (not that they ever even intended a KK sequel so it's dumb to compare it anyway, but SHUT UP!). Disagree? MORON! Don't you see it's "underperforming" because, well, because we say so? Isn't it obvious that "studio suits" are shying away from a sequel??? .... Ugh, for Christ's sake, THERE WAS A CROCKODILE DUNDEE 3!!! Crock-o-dile Dun-Dee THREE. Just think about that for a moment, hope and pray with me for a sequel (which, by all recent comic book movie standards, will fucking RULE over the original), and let's maybe just stop using every talkback to insist SR is gay, sucks, underperforming, "the WORST FILM EVER, ARRRRRRGGHH!", and everyone who disagrees is obviously a fanboy moron.
-
The film had the biggest opening weekend of all time. It's almost a certainty that it will be the highest grossing movie of 2006. Normal movie-goers (you know, not TalkBalk trolls) are scoring it at a B+ at Yahoo (with over 20,000 votes) and at a 7.9 at IMDB (4,000 votes). The movie is a certified, unassailable success. Those are the facts, and they are undisputed.
-
... I'm not professing any "insider knowledge" myself. I don't have a crystal ball. If it's as simple as "duh, it made money, let's make a sequel, quick!", then I dread a future of Fantastic Four suckfests pumped out at lightning speed. What I find most troubling here is that when I see a movie that leaves me feeling "meh," like, say, X3, I'd rather discuss what I thought went wrong from a personal viewer perspective and consider how future films could be better. What I've seen people write on this site, by contrast, is NA-NA-NA-NA-BOO-BOO, YOUR FILM SUUU-UUUCKS. NA-NA-NA-NA-BOO-BOO, SINGER'S GAAA-AAAY. Sigh ... so now I'm actively hoping that studios DON'T listen to comic fandom if that's the type of loudmouth assholes they'd hear from. I used to think movies would benefit from listening to the fan base ... now, I think we're mostly a bunch of stuck-up bitches who'd rather gloat over Box Office (wtf?!? what movie fan gives two shits about THAT?!?) than discuss how the NEXT film could be better. Studio already have too many assholes like that slinking around, planning "Scary Movie" sequels and making Jessica Alba a "star."
-
ZakChase, why is it all a pissing contest? I'm glad you made at least a passing reference to Yahoo! and IMDB ratings ... but still, WTF?!? "oooooh, 7.9?" It MUST be good!!! I'll pre-order the DVD now so that the studio KNOWS it's good and makes more!" On the one hand, I'm glad Johnny Depp is being recognized as a bankable star - I think he makes good choices, generally. But how about a Talkback where movies are discussed on their fucking merits? Oh, nevermind ... what's the box office again? Woo-hoo! Yeah, hand-slap, rockin'! What's more fucking important than that? I bet the "studio suits" are sucking each other's cocks and making fifteen Disney-ride themed movies for next year! I can't WAIT for the fucking "Tea Cups" movie!!! I'll wait to actually see the fucking thing (after Scanner Darkly and a few documentaries) before I discuss it's merits. I don't give a shit what it's BO is, and I can't understand why that suddenly became THE issue for movie fan geeks ...
-
But I still feel compelled to point out the obvious because so many jaded TalkBalkers seem to be ignoring these simple truths while they viciously attack a superbly executed sequel for no good reason. Oh, and as for that "Tea Cups" movie -- I think Peter Weir would be perfect for it.
-
Thanks for cluttering up the POTC2 TB with your 800 word essays on how SR sucks. 20 words is sufficient to express the full range of your thoughts on the matter. The rest is just mundane repetition and childish insults. Just so you know, people don't buy DVDs from word of mouth. They pick it up easily because it's the cost of 1.5 movie tickets, you watch it as much as you want, anytime you want, with as few or as many people as you want. And you watch it for the extras. It's the biggest bang for the buck in entertainment next to a video game. So much for your expert analysis on the film industry. Go upstairs now, your mother is calling.
-
Peter Weir nothing! How about "Its A Small World After All" contraversially directed by Roman Polanski? Oh, there might be a liiiiiiittttllllleee contraversy and trouble on set, but hey...
-
But we all know Oliver Stone's "Hall of Presidents" trilogy will be more controversial.
-
that dvds dont sell well because bad word of mouth? Good gravy, what world do these people come from? I could take the time to point out DVDs like Sky Captain, Titan AE, King Kong, and other films that performed below (sometimes waaaayyy below) expectations and in turn scored a king's ransom on DVD, but what would be the point? Its obvious that these two dont see reason and, in moviemack's case, sidesteps direct questions. Moviemack--what are your favorite movies? What sorts of summer films are you a fan of?
-
contraversy/publicity is sure to dwarf Stone's Presidents movie once the child actors are hired ;).
-
I think Polanski would have to go the all-CGI route to avoid certain, uh, allegations.
-
As an added bonus, the oscars would fling an orgy of nominations his way.
-
The cereal boxes and potato chips that you speak of. The studio doesn't pay the food companies for that. It's the other way around. They pay the STUDIO for the likeness and character rights because having movie characters on their products promotes the PRODUCT (from POTC fruit chews to ROTS tampons etc...). Movies sell chips, chips don't sell movies... and since these companies are paying the studio... DINGDINGDING! additional revenue.
-
Yes, Kai said this in the same post: (1) SR DVD sales will be disappointing because it will reflect its disappointing B.O. and (2) If SR DVD sales are a success, it will only be due to WB's tricky marketing. How's that for a brain twister? And he's concerned about SR making $200 Million domestically at the B.O., calling the film a failure if it doesn't. This from a guy who lives in his mother's basement and makes $9K a year delivering for Pizza Hut.
-
Granted, he is probably only trolling for Superman Returns. Moviemack, on the other hand, well...we all know about moviemack. Oh well, c'est la vie.
-
You know, I hate Michael Bay as much as the next human being with a pulse, but I do feel that Bay was singled out a bit after Speilburg had shown us all it was okay in Minority "stick your add here" Report. Then again, if the island had had a good story or even semi enjoyable characters, we wouldnt have noticed.
-
instead of just adding a couple Jack Sparrows, they should have the Kraken and the zombie pirates and everything. Lord knows they can afford it.
-
And he uses it TO DEATH! There is always a kid illuminated in some kind of otherworldly glow or color combination. And dont even get me started about his inability to do a story involving a normal family unit. Not that I'm complaining about those stories, mind you, just the fact that those stories are always by Spielerg, with rarely an exception. Oh well, I guess if he werent quirky or overt we wouldnt be talking about him.
-
Stop Hating People. This is a pure popcorn entertainment flick, and a great one. How any of the critics, and some of the talkbackers didn't like it, I just don't understand. This movie rocked on so many levels!
-
I heard he's angling to direct Dakota Fanning in "Child loved: The Jean Benet Ramsey Story."
-
POTC: DMC was just all over the place. A couple of fun sequences (Jack's escape tied to the pole, the water wheel), the Elizabeth twist, and Barbossa's return were great, but the film seemed to be mostly a showcase for the special effects for Davy Jones and his henchmen. (I mean, does any pirate just DIE in this trilogy without becoming an undead sea monster?) SUPERMAN RETURNS at least told a story, even though it wasn't told as well as it should have been, but POTC: DMC was just setup for the third film. Can't wait for Captain Jack and Boba Fett to escape from inside the Kraken, though.
-
This is really flogging this to death, but there are some BO misunderstandings here. Oversimplifying, the studio has to split the box office with the theaters roughly even. SR is listed at costing $260 M, but after marketing and prints, it's north of $350 M. How far north is something we'll never know now. So that means SR has to do at least $700 M gross to cover its costs. It's looking like about a $350 M shortfall WW when all is said and done. Yes, there are other important sources of revenue. But I think merchandising could be overestimated. Nothing hits the markdown aisle faster than movie merch. DVD's too can often disappoint. Can't-miss SHREK 2 DVD sales were way overestimated, causing Pixar to take a hit. Often the real moneymaker is the video game, but it all depends on how the pie is sliced up. SR definitely could break even, but that may not be enough. Studios usually have only one or two big blockbusters a year that have to pay the bills for ones that fail.
As for a sequel, I'll backtrack some and say no doubt, except for when?. They spent too much good money acquiring the rights. And Hollywood's too short on ideas that they won't eventually try again. I mean Ang Lee only killed the Hulk for a while with talk now of a reboot. But ya think they're gonna ask him back again? (Unless HULK cross to other side.)I think marketing of the next Supe film, the entire cast, writers, and maybe even Singer will be second guessed, which will delay things for some time to come. At least until greed triumphs again over fear. The good reviews will likely lead them to think it was marketing. But I think there may be something wrong with the traditional characters. SMALLVILLE's treatment seems to have more resonance today. Bosworth should be gone and they'll at least take a long look at Routh replacements. BTW, PIRATES2 was a little better than SR, IMHO, but both could lose 30 minutes. I've never seen a movie with more rules since GREMLINS. Spidey may have kept the more esoteric record of largest opening gross per venue, but I haven't looked. P2 has kindof rewitten most records...... Don't make me, Ang Ree. They won't like me Ang Ree. -
I actually talked to a naive girl that actually thought that the first film was actually titled this. I don't know what was funnier; the fact that she did not know any better, or the fact that she did not know what a "pearl necklace" truly is. And no I did not show her (she works for me).
-
Cause as near as I can tell, there was similar marketing hype for kong and kong was estimated at 30 million advertising price. The only reason none of us count advertising in these budgets is because none of the studios divulge the information and so there is no point speculating. Again, as for your 260 million budget is concerned, 60 mil of it was for other films (superman dies, lives, blah blah)--not this one. Oh, I realize that people like to lump those two figures together to make a better story, but the sad fact is that Superman Returns' budget was 204 million, a bit less than pirates and and certainly less than King Kong.
-
with that piece of crap direct to video sequel that Disney put out. After all, the semi profitable DTV couldnt have existed without that spectacular wreck of a movie Atlantis, right?
-
I should have used Batman and robin as the failed movie and Batman Returns inability to exist without that horrible film. Perhaps I could have used Star Trek 6, Batman Returns, or a jillion other examples. I just happened to be watching "Milo's return" with my son while I was typing. sigh...
-
Verbinski's the one who got his money up on the screen. POTC2 looks like it cost four times as much as Superman Returns. Singer, I suspect, just blew wads of cash getting that CGI cape to flutter juuuust right.
-
And verbinski even had a bigger, waayyyy more expensive cast, much more detailed, expensive sets, and filmed on the freaking ocean (which isnt cheap, people). Singer took 6 months for principle shooting, for crying out loud. 6 months for something that should have taken between 60 and 90 days ON THE OUSTSIDE MOST. Add to that the 5 million jor-el effect, a 10 million, fully filmed, scored, and realized Krypton sequence that was cut, and it becomes very obvious that this movie should have only costed about 150 to 160 mil.
-
when you hire a director who refuses to properly story board and plan his movie at the outset. Same thing happens with Peter Jackson in King Kong and return of the king/two tower's infamous saruman (shove it on the dvd) missing resolution, refilming of Helms deep. Oh sure, Peter got lucky in that his novice approach didnt bite him in the ass with LOTR, but it got him in King Kong, just as it did with Singer and many other directors who dont have the discipline and indepth vision it requires to film a blockbuster. These things have to be done on budget, otherwise, they will still be in the red or barely break even despite success. King Kong made a lot of money and still came out in the red due to PJ's lack of discipline, just as Superman, despite its obvious blockbuster status, will now barely break even due to Singer's lack of restraint.
-
Voodoo magic...Fuckin voodoo magic mon! King Willy Voodoo Priest of The LA possee brought 'im back to life. Dere is no stoppin what can't be stopped! No killin what can't be killed! This is dread mon! TRULY DREAD! Oh and the Barbossa cameo ruled your fuckin asses and you know it!
-
Singer is one of those small, indipendent rookie film makers that seem to think they can accomplish what Spielburg, Cameron, and Lucas accomplish as long as they have the chance. This idea is furthered by the success of Raimi, whom singer thinks he can emulate. The problem is that Raimi, like lucas, spielberg, and cameron, already has a specific plan of attack before he even rolls on camera 1. Everything is exactingly story boarded, and budgets are strictly adhered to (Raimi had the knack for this due to his Evil Dead experience). Look what Spielberg's War of the Worlds could do in less than a year's time with very minimal, for today, effects budget. Look what Lucas could do in Revenge of the Sith on a budget of 120 mil. It takes a real knack to be a blockbuster film director--you have to have a highly detailed vision, far more detailed than an indipendent and/or "normal" film director. This is why many critics scoff at blockbuster movies; they feel there is little room to breathe, to experiment in a blockbuster. They may be right, but that is what you have to do when playing with a huuuuge amount of cash. Fiscal discipline and intense vision.
-
Anyone else agree? Forget SUPERMAN RETURNS vs. PIRATES, now there is a movie that demands some attention!
-
Perhaps Singer's previous efforts are also overrrated- and McQuarrie was the creative talent behind The Usual Suspects?
-
Who would have guessed that Mr. Crabs was Jack Sparrow's father?
-
Look what happened with X-men 1. I'll grant you, X-men had a low budget for an effects movie-75 mil. Still, it had an unkown cast, save for tv actor Stewert and theatrical actor Mckellen (he'd only just been cast as Gandalf). Its sets were very, very basic; that film should have had twice the amount effects it had with the same budget. X-2 had twice the budget and still came out with roughly the exact same amount of effects and NO mutant v. mutant action that involved anything more than wirefu.
-
Don't forget the stunning visual effects in Shark Attack 3. when you see that shark swallow a guy on a wave runner, you say. wow, if they can do that with only 1 thousand dollars imagine how it would look with 10,000 dollars !!!
-
And although it did look better than the second movie, you would never have believed that it costed 225 million dollars. Pirates of the Caribbean 1 and 2, Spiderman 1 and 2, Star Trek: Nemisis (bad movie, great effects), War of the Worlds (and damn near every other spielburg flick), and the Star Wars movies are all classic examples of how that budget really gets stretched and spent wisely when you INTESELY plan ahead and stick to said plan. King Kong, Superman Returns, and all 3 X films are classic examples of what happens financially when films have no planning.
-
Don't lynch me for mentioning him. I have no intention of bringing the curse of his followers on this talkback. But fact is, when this guy makes movies, because of his TV background he is very tight on budget, he films stuff that looks pretty good faster and cheaper than other guys. So a film like Wonder Woman, I think will come in at a very reasonable cost to the AOL-Time Warner execs. Is there an audience for a Wonder Woman movie? Honestly. Guys who like superheroes will feel immasculated going to see it and girls probably think she's a sexist male fantasy. But at least it won't cost them too much money to make. Pirates of the Carribbean, though, looked amazing. It is fantastic how much they pulled from their money. They spent money much more efficiently than Singer.
-
how does anyone criticize rotten tomatoes for "panning" a movie? do any of you realize how that website works? by compiling reviews. and for the record, huge box office for panned films usually means the public at large is retarded. not that critics are useless. i still know more people who were disappointed by pirates then who loved it.
-
But I should still kick your ass for bringing up his name, though. Goddamn browncoats...
-
...including Dead Man's Chest. Verbinski seems to strike that perfect balance between newfangled CGI FX (Davy Jones, the Kraken) and old-school filmmaking featuring elaborate sets and stunts and mechanical FX. Sometimes, when CGI is overused, whole scenes come off looking -- not necessarily fake -- but without any real weight. Verbinski clearly knows how to blend the two styles for maximum effect.
-
until the last 45 minutes or so. i didn't love it the way i did the first one. and i'm of the definite opinion that movies that have sequels filmed back to back are always going to have suckage involved. with the exception of lotr of course. but the back to the future and matrix trilogies prove this, and now pirates has a part 2 that is nothing more than a 2 hour and 45 minute filler to promote part 3. fuck it, i'm going back to see superman again. that was much much much better!
-
The dude has no skill or style. Especially when you consider "Hellboy" had almost the same budget as "X1", and "X1" had high class Cable Access Show special effects. I remember when my cousin made fun of "T2" when Arnold drops the box of roses. He laughed that the roses were "Mad Fake". But I always knew Cameron was a good director from seeing that one tiny scene. Why waste budget money on real flowers? And I'm glad someone mentioned War of the Worlds, aside from the super lame Happy Ending, the effects were great. And I like how Spielberg made the film look pale so that the CGI looked realistic. He also made that movie really fucking fast. How long did it take to film Superman? Maybe Warners should spend a couple of bucks and fucking hire a good director for Part 2. I'm willing to give Superman another shot if they do a complete overhaul. But part 1 ruined it for A LOT of people.
-
Anne Hathaway should be Warner's top choice for the role of Wonder Woman. Wonder Woman can't be some unrelatable bad ass cold as steel chick. Guys aren't the only people who are going to go see it. She needs to relate to Girls. And who better than the Princess Diaries chick. She has 2 successful 100 plus million dollar kid movies, successful turns in indie films, and now another mainstream 100 mil hit. She is also tall. Just send her to fight training for a couple of months. If Keanu can be Neo. Hathaway can be Wonder Woman. You hear me Whedon?
-
Well, this is just my own personal opinion, but I dont think Singer will have a problem filming a titanic battle. The thing with Superman is that there isnt any need for choreography--its basically just watching two guys slug/brawl it out; he shouldnt have a problem filming that. I do agree, however, that WB needs to impress upon him the need for staying within budget. Had singer stayed within his 185 mil budget, I think there would have been a lot less complaints; then again, it seems that the trolls and certain people who have it in for singer/superman want to combine 60 mil with the budget. In any case, his production would have easily broken even rather than the slog they'll be pulling to get their money back theatrically. I think most likely he'll be doing the sequel, but you never know.
-
I'm sure I can't be the only one sick to fucking death of every TB turning into off-topic Supes whining. And moondoggy, you need to get your head out of your ass and learn to read BO numbers. SR "more than likely to break even"? Not domestically, it's just not possible at this point. Star Trek 1 as successful as Supes 1? No fucking way, Supes was a HUGE hit and set box office records (and yes, the character was hugely popular with the mainstream audience - I think Supes 3 and 4 are more to blame than singer, not to mention that the film IS popular, it just hasn't been popular enough to cover its costs). Batman 1 and Batman Returns made big profits. And almost all the Star Trek movies for which budget numbers are available made a profit. Quit being such a clueless moron and speading misinformation - kindly shut the fuck up.
-
"Superman: The Movie" made $367 million in today's dollars. So it was a resounding smash, as a new "Superman" movie today could be if it opened at the right time and was, you know, actually great. And for the record, I'm a Bryan Singer fan. "Superman Returns" is really the first movie of his I haven't liked. (Yes, I thought "Apt Pupil" was pretty interesting.) So I wasn't rooting for him to fail, and I remain unconvinced (at this point) that he should be replaced for any sequel, should Warner Bros. move ahead with one. He needs to do a much better job in the story and budgeting departments, though.
-
future D.C. flicks (with the exception of Batman) are screwed. I.e. Wonderwoman, the Flash, Green Lantern, won't get nearly the budget needed to be great. Expect (Fantastic Fouresque) quality productions for these flicks. Hell, who'd think $100 million wouldn't be enough.
-
excellent call on Hellboy, by the way. That film was filmed a few years after X1 (so inflation made his budget slightly smaller) and still seemed two to three times the size of X-men. I can't believe I forgot about that movie! Again, it all goes back to directorial experience. In my completely uninformed opinion, it would seem that Singer is too much of a novice director who gets too caught up in set detail takes waaaayyy too long to film a movie. He's one of those directors that need to stick to small, dramatic films and/or romantic comedies. That said, I'm dying to find out what happens next in Superverse, so as long as they keep the same donner tone and continue the character relationships responsibly AND give me my titanic battle, I couldnt care less if Singer is attached to Superman Returns.
-
Maybe you need to stop telling people to "shut the fuck up" and start learning how to read. I said waaayyy back on the TB that Batman, although it made a huge chunk of change theatrically, didnt score any profit for WB because of the movie's ultimate cost. Its budget was 35 mil, yes, but Burton, Nicholson, and Prince each had a piece of the pie when it came to gross. When it was all said and done, Batman costed WB between about 150 mil to make, and since a studio only gets 50% of gross, guess what happened? And I never said nothing about batman returns being unprofitable, you chuckle head--read again. And when did I ever say that Star Trek was as successful as Supes? I said Star Trek broke even or earned some profit theatrically. Next time, minderbinder, speak in a civil tongue and listen to the grownups or you'll be asked to go back to the kiddie's table.
-
and just so you know, there's a whole hunk of theater goers out there beyond our borders. Most blockbusters earn HALF of their money domestically and HALF internationally. Batman Begins didnt break even domestically, yet here we all are, talking about who's going to star as the joker in the upcomming sequel.
-
....talking back to 'moderator' moondoggy in such a imperious tone, will surely get your ass banned. How dare you have a divergent and, dare I say, realistic opinion and see things the way they really are, as opposed to through rosy-coloured Singer-fanboy glasses? Have you not been paying attention at all to this talkback? Calling things the way they really are is simply NOT allowed. You have to see profit, where everybody else sees underperfomer, and sequel where everyone else sees franchise-killer. Get with the freaking program man. Otherwise, he'll call you a troll,....or something else nasty..... like that.....
-
Foreign box office from SR will cause the film to break even. Or did you trolls realize that box office is a WORLDWIDE AFFAIR, not just a DOMESTIC one? When all is said and done, SR will have at least $400 mil worldwide - more than justifiable for a sequel. And y'all know DAMN WELL WB is gonna do a Superman sequel. And, yes, Singer will be at the helm. It'll be a lot less talky with a lot more action (and, hopefully, a hard ass Lex Luthor). But a sequel is coming, bitches. Deal with it. P.S.: POTC 2 was BOR-ING!!!
-
Jul 10, 2006 11:20:53 AM CDT
I think you are wrong about how box-office cut goes
by engineer_at_peac
You keep saying the theaters get half and the studios get half. That's dead wrong. The cut a theater gets is actually variable, and increases as time passes. Opening Weekend, the studio is going to get nigh 100% of cut from tickets sold, and as the weeks pass they get less and less of a cut. So theaters really like movies like Batman Begins which have legs and continue grossing high after opening weekend. This is my understanding of the matter, anyhow.
-
Right now, Disney would cough up as much money as Gore and Johnny want to keep making POTC films -- no questions asked. Meanwhile, you can bet that Warner Bros. and Singer will be sitting down to have a very serious discussion about storylines and budget before any sequel is greenlit.
-
.......and now, suddenly its Foriegn Box office and International markets that are going to save Superman Returns; forget DVD sales, forget 'good legs' and all that 'word-of-mouth' stuff, forget merchandising. Foreign B.O. is where redemption is to be found. Sad. Let's not forget that so far SR foreign take, as of last week anyway, was roughly between $30-40 million; and some are talking about it doing half its business abroad - right now it's doing about one-sixth it's total take abroad. Really Sad. Straw, meet fanboys. Fanboys, clutch straw.
-
Geez, I loved this flick! As some have said, if you can't have fun at this movie, just go ahead and run out into traffic. The CGI/makeup should get an Oscar nomination...really done well. The musical score was very good...liked it a lot. Loved the action....was not unlike an Indiana Jones movie. The homage...and it was that...to "20,000 Leagues Under The Sea" was pretty cool. Disney has some special mojo when it comes to movies made on (and under) water, I guess. Looking forward to At World's End on Memorial Day!
-
and just to reiterate one last time, since Kai seems to have reading comprehension problems: Supes Returns's production will break even theatrically once its finished its run. It has already earned 1.4ish billion dollars in merchandising, and will make a good chunk of change on its DVD release. Kai--let me say it slowly, capitalized, and with lots of elipses: SUPERMAN...HAS...NOT...HAD...ITS...EUROPEAN...RELEASE...YET. Now, take a few moments to think that out. Now, why would it only earn 20 or 30 million internationally (mainly australia)? Look back at my capitalized statement if you need to--there's no rush. Now, here's the next part of the lecture, kai. Batman Begins also broke even. Yeah, I know, thats an amazing concept. However, when you add dvd sales and merchandising, WB made lots of money. So what do you think they're doing, kai? Good boy--they're making a sequel. Very good, kai. Now, here comes the hard question. If Superman is doing the same thing Batman is doing, what do you think WB will do with the superman property? Its okay, Kai, just shout it out when you know.
-
Two words: WORLD CUP. I think the only flicks that got relased in Europe were X3, M:I:3 and Da Vinci Code. None of the studios were planning on dropping the rest of their lineup (SR included) till AFTER the World Cup was done.
-
If I was a Warner Bros. exec (and I should be), I'd feel a lot better about a "Batman Begins" sequel than "Superman Returns" sequel. "Begins" did pretty well financially and had solid staying power in theaters only because Nolan hit one out of the park with his reboot. Word of mouth was great, and I suspect many people burned good by Schumacher first discovered the joys of "Begins" on DVD and even HBO (which runs it nonstop). Because of this, I think "Batman Begins II" is a lock to outgross the first one. "Superman Returns II," considering the first movie's deficiencies -- not so much. And, remember, studios are in this business to make money, not to break even.
-
This guy/girl had early trailer descriptions on Pirates 2 and Superman Returns in the past and they were always accurate. Looks like he got Pirates 3 too. Check it out: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0449088/board/post/tt0449088
-
...the movie "Time Bandits"; just with Harry's head substituted in. I guess he wanted a pirate theme without directly copying anything from POTC.
-
Blah blah blah Superman. Blah blah Singer. Blah blah Harry fat ass, blah blah average moviegoer, blah blah the Industry, blah blah Watchmen screenplay, blah blah blah Shatner Klingon Krypton Portman, moron, profit fanboy Moriarty Spielberg, popcorn, Clerks, black talkback post. Yak yak blah gay spoiler retard boobs. Blah blah Snakes on a Plane. Oh, were we talking about the Pirates movie? Sorry....
-
Let's make this simple for you since you obviously have trouble understan ding the most basic concepts. If a movie makes at least as much money in domestic theatrical release as it cost to produce, it's considered a success and a money maker. I'm fully aware of international release, splitting gross with theatres and other factors. To put is simply for you, the extra money made overseas generally evens out the money that is kept by theatre owners. (Studios also generally get a higher cut of the domestic release and often get a higher percentage earlier in the movie's run) Batman 89 cost 35M and made 250 domestic. Even if it "really" cost 150M due to profit sharing, it's still hugely profitable. Even when you look at that 250M gross being split with theatres, once you factor in international dollars, it's that much more profitable (half of the $400M worldwide is $200M, more than the $150 you claim it cost to make...see why you're looking like such a fool?). Just look at what you're saying: a movie that cost $35M to make and made over $400M worldwide (TEN TIMES THE COST!) didn't make a profit? Are you completely insane? As for Batman REturns, I misspoke, I was talking about Batman Begins, which was plenty profitable. Now you're denying that you said ST1 was as succesful as the first Superman movie? Here's the quote: "Superman has NEVER had broad appeal. Even when the first movie was released back in 79/80, it was only as successful as Star Trek: the Motion Picture" So are you lying or just that clueless that you can't remember YOUR OWN POST (and apparently too lazy to go back and see what you wrote)? You're still wrong about that one, the first Supes made over 60% more than the first Trek. I also think you're full of shit about Peter Jackson, ("a director who refuses to properly story board and plan his movie at the outset"???) - Jackson plans the hell out of his films, he uses storyboards and previz as much as just about any other director, as evidenced by the insane bang for buck he got in the LOTR films. Kong is jam packed with visuals, I'd argue it's better looking than either X3 or Supes, both of which cost more. And while it didn't live up to some unrealistic expectations, it most certainly was profitable in its theatrical run. You're telling ME to learn to read? Get a fucking clue already.
-
Oh, there are structural similarities sure. I have no doubt that that's what they were going for. But, the way it's executed is much different, and much inferior. I'm sorry if this has been done before, but imagine if ESB had gone a little something like this...
On Yavin IV, it is the wedding day of Luke and Leia, (at this point unaware of the enormous incestuousnes of it all,) when Jabba the Hutt shows up, has everyone detained, and presses Luke into tracking down his old buddy Han Solo, or else Leia dies. meanwhile, Han has procurred a piece of parchment with a mysterious keycard imprint upon it, but when Chewie presses the matter Han is dodgy about finding the keycard or whatever it unlocks. While in the cargo section of the Falcon, Han is then visited by his old buddy Anikin Skywalker, who informs Han that the evil Darth Vader is ready to collect on the debt Han owes. (By the way, Anikin and Darth are neccissarily not the same person in this version.) Anikin is also discouraged to learn that Luke has gone smuggler and rebel as well. Meanwhile, Luke makes some inquiries on Tatooine and discovers that the Millenium Falcon has been spotted on Endor. Luke shows up, and discovers that Han has gotten himself into trouble with the local Ewok population, who have deemed him a god but are determined to eat him. Some antics ensue with Luke, Han, Chewie and eventually the droids as they barely manage to escape the canaballistic Ewoks. Meanwhile, Leia hitches a ride on a local freighter to get off of Yavin IV, and manipulates the crew to make Port in Tatooine. Han finds Darth Vader's Super Star Destroyer and sends Luke over to investigate, with the advice, "If you get caught, tell them Han solo sent you to settle his debt. It might save your life." Luke is captured by Darth Vader, and Darth Vader confronts Han on his treachery. Vader insists that Han hand over his life to service to Vader aboard the Star Destroyer, whose primary mission is to rescue stranded astronauts and press them into service to rescue more stranded astronauts and press them into service, and etc. Han weedles with Vader, and Vader agress Han will go free if he can round up 100 rebels to press into service. Han returns to Tatooine for just such a purpose. Meanwhile, Luke encounters his doomed father Anikin aboard the Star Destroyer, who informs him that what Han and Jabba are after is the mysterious Kaiburr Crystal, which once belonged to vader but he gave up when it reminded him of a spurned love, so he placed it in a metal chest and marooned it on a distant world. And Vader still has the keycard to that chest still hidden on his person. He then Challenges Vader to a high stakes dice game, all to find the location of the keycard. Not understanding this, Anikin enters the game to save Lukes life, but instead dooms himself to forever serve Vader on the Star Destroyer. Luke then escapes the star destroyer in a small shuttle. At that time, Han is in the cantina in Mos Eisely, feigning to recruit a smuggler's crew for the Falcon, so that in actutality he can trade them to Vader. During this time, Lando Callrisien shows up, still boiling mad about Han appropriating the Falcon from him years ago, and gets into a bar fight. Leia at this point joins up with them, and when all is said and done, Han uses her force sensitivity to discover the Kaiburr Crystal is actually on the planet Circarpous V. Han, Chewie, Leia and Lando set off for it in the Falcon. Luke is picked up by a rebel ship, which is destroyed by the Sarlac Monster, a free floating Space creature used at Vader's bidding. Luke escapes in another shuttle, and makes it to Circarpous V just as Han, Leia, Chewie and Lando do. The chest containing the Kaiburr Crystal is revealed, but all seek it for a different reason: Han, to black mail Vader into releasing him from his debt. Luke, to destroy it and kill Vader, there by freeing his father Anikin. And Lando, to trade to Jabba the Hutt for his ship and his city bespin back. The three then engage in a long and drawn out saber duel, as Vader's forces invade the planet to recover and secure the crystal. In the confusion, Han thinks he's secured the Crystal for himself, when in actuality Lando has spirited it off. Aboard the Falcon, Han faces Vader and cockily announces he's bested Vader, but discovers he does not have the crystal. Vader then summons the Sarlac to destroy the Falcon. Han abondons ship in an escape pod, and Leia announces he's a coward. She and Luke and Chewie desparately try to fight the Sarlac, with little luck. Han then returns to the falcon, and fires a laser blast that detonates some cargo and wounds the sarlac. Even so, the decision is made to abandon the Falcon, for when the sarlac returns. Leia then embraces Han, but uses this to lock him to the Falcon, so the Sarlac doesn't come after the other escape pods. When last seen, the Sarlac swallows the Falcon and Han whole. Lando is seen returning the Kaiburr crystal to Jabba the Hutt, and Luke, Leia and chewie take refuge with Yoda. Yoda then declares that Han can be rescued if they voyage far beyond the outer rim, into the unknown space. He then declares they need a guide who knows such space, and we cut to figure descending stairs in Yoda's hut, who turns out to be none other than Governor Tarkin, who ofcourse died in the previous movie. -
Everyone here knows how RottenTomatoes works. However, THEY decide whether they think a review is "fresh" or "rotten" and have been rather dubious in their distinctions. You'll see a terrible review with a backhanded compliment listed as "fresh" or a GREAT review with healthy constuctive criticism listed as "rotten". They decide how they want the numbers to look and they have just as much agenda as anyone else that accepts ad dollars.
-
As far as I can tell, Rotten Tomatoes bases it's "fresh" or "rotten" status solely on a reviewer's point system (thumbs, letter grades, numbers, etc.) Can you offer an example where a 3 or 4 star review was given a "rotten" or a 1 or 2 star review was given "fresh"?
-
It can make a decent amount of change over seas. Look at "Kingdom of Heaven", only 47 million here in the US but 164 million overseas. DVD sales are also a money maker. But I see Superman not getting a sequel until a couple of years from now. While the critics may like it, the general public showed what they thought about the film by not opening their wallets. It's like "The Hulk", high anticipation for a movie based on a character you grew up with, only to find out the film lacks the FUN that we go to the movies to get in the first place.
-
So here's a question about the actual movie. What was the whole point of the East India tea co? And if Norrington already had the pardon papers (that had already been signed, I thought), why did he need to negotiate with EITC using Davy Jones heart as a bargaining chip? If getting the heart was the point of the thing for Jack, why didn't he use it, instead of unsuccessfully trying to hide it? If the heart was the big maguffin, then why didn't we at least see what the point of it was by showing someone controlling DJ with it? And where was the climax to the film? There wasn't one. A final scene plot twist is not a climax. The final attack of the Kraken was not a climax, since we'd already seen it twice and nothing new was happening. This was a very long half of a movie. I maintain that this film was very fun and enjoyable and great to look at but utterly free of substance and totally convoluted. As far as the traditional rules of filmmaking, including the three act stucture, as well as character, plot, big ideas, beautiful imagery, emotional content, SR was just the better film, hands down, in My opinion (notice that last part which indicates that what I've said is not Incontrovertible, Unquestionable Fact. You guys should try it sometime). But yes, there's room for both, as there should be. Any movie that gives Bill Nighy something interesting to do is going to be on my must-see list. Now back to the pointless box office name calling.
-
On any review with a numeric or grade rating, it's determined by that value (and the critic makes the decision where the line is drawn). And many critics enter their reviews to the website themselves, in which case they decide for themselves if it's fresh or rotten. RT only decides if the review has no quantitative value and the critic doesn't submit it themself, so they don't really have much power over which way a film goes.
-
Many of you are racking your brains needlessly. It's not worth the effort. Dead Man's Chest was a script built around visual-only set pieces and "We should have a __ somewhere in the movie." Curse of the Black Pearl had a better flow, narrative-wise, partly I guess because there were not as many obligatory elements.
-
At least I thought it did when I watched it. On the commentary track for "Black Pearl", Ted & Terry explain the plot of THAT movie for days, and yes...it actually makes sense for the most part. I'm sure the same is true of DMC...nothing stood out as all that confusing actually--with the exception of the rules for that damn dice game. WTF???
-
YARRRR
-
The only real use for the heart is that if you destroy it, you can kill Davey Jones. So there's no way to immediately "use" the heart when you get it - the value of it is that you can use it as a negotiating tool to have power over DJ. And since DDJ controls the kraken, whoever has the heart controls DJ, and therefore controls the sea. The East India Trading Company is a real life company from that era, there's much info to be googled (or wiki'd) if you want it. I'd disagree that the movie had no climax. I found Sparrow's return to the ship (putting others above his own selfish needs for the first time we're aware of), Elizabeth's double cross, and Jack getting eaten to be enough of a climax to satisfy me. I think things like "three act structure" and "the rules of filmmaking" are overrated and great films can break the rules. As for the pardons, I'm not sure exactly how those worked. I found them confusing myself and hopefully I'll understand better on further viewings.
-
some of these posts make me feel like I've accidently stumbled into a Financiers board meeting. I know it's been said before, but do some of you have a financial investment in these films? Or does it just massage your ego by pretending to be all knowledgeable about 'the business'? When has popularity ever been the same as quality? Do you feel vindicated because your chosen film is making money? Do you feel the need to wear a film's box office like a badge of pride? Films are subjective; you either like it or you don't; if you are so shallow that you feel you can't enjoy a film if it 'underperforms', then you need to take a step back and analyse your piss-poor, empty exsistence.
Cheers. -
I had orginally predicted it would make about $400 mil domestic. At the rate its going, using similar movies (like Spidey) to predict the trends, it should be at around $250 mil by the end of next weekend. I don't think it will hit $600 mil Titanic numbers but I do think it will find its way to around $500 mil, especially since it has virtually no other blockbuster competition for the rest of the summer (please don't tell me SR is going to rebound now that school's out...school's BEEN out...the movie will be lucky to hit $200 mil). I am not ashamed to say I've seen it twice and it was even better the 2nd time. Might take some more friends to see it again next weekend. Hmmm, maybe it can beat Titanic...
-
Actually, while the way she went about making Jack own up was a deception, Jack was putting all of their lives at risk and running away from his responsibility - again. He would have kept doing that, possibly getting someone (other than Jack, of course) killed. So in a way, he deserved exactly what he got. But Lizzie was tempted by him and kind of liked it, which was an unpleasant realisation. Obviously she feels bad because she's going to go get him.
-
going all Anakin Skywalker there at the end. Doubt she will go thoroughly rotten, though, it will be interesting to see her struggle with this in the 3rd. Do you think she still loves Will, or just platonically?
-
Trading Company, as plainly stated in the film, is that they want control of the seas and that they believe the era of pirates has come to an end. Setting it up for a massive confrontation in the 3rd.
-
This hasn't really been covered much yet, so here goes...I think one of the greatest strengths of the first film was that it had enormous rewatchability. I've seen it numerous times, and it still sucks me in, I think I even liked it more on second and third viewings than the first time. I liked this movie, but not as much as the first...haven't been back yet but I'm curious how it will fare on repeat viewings. I suspect it might get a little better the second time around, and I think it probably get a lot of play on my DVD player. Opinions? Anyone back for a second viewing yet? Along the same lines, I think many crowd pleasing movies get mixed reactions initially but people tend to forgive the flaws as the years go on, as long as the movie is good and entertaining overall. I wonder if this will be one of those films? It seems like most of the complaints are pretty minor and forgivable, especially if the third movie resolves things in a satisfying way. It's funny, people tend to hate "middle" movies, especially with cliffhangers (BttF2, Matrix 2, even Empire Strikes Back to some degree), but this may be the first movie that really breaks that curse.
-
Jul 10, 2006 2:09:55 PM CDT
They should have just done like in Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang
by 'cholera's ghost
Hey, Barbossa's back. Might as well bring back everybody else who died, too. Wait. I guess nobody in this entire series has really, actually, died yet. Hey, I'm a big fan of Pirates One, and Rush nailed that last scene, but come on--this was ultimately fun but dumb fluff that makes the mistake of trying to make an epic out of a one-movie set of ideas and characters. Less would definitely have been more in this case. I hate to say it but I've just gotten more entrenched in my intense hatred for sequels. The sequels to the Matrix, Blues Brothers, and now this ruined what were basically perfect stand-alones. Ah, the power of money to compromise art. All I have to say is Pirates 3 better be Damn. Good. I'll drink ta that!
-
because there is a lot of information and foreshadowing setting up the 3rd film. If you care about the characters, of course.
-
I can see there is not "convincing" you. The films I brought up were not comparable to SR no, I was merely giving DVD examples. You really don't know the industry. I'll be crucified here if I say that I work in the studio system, but who cares. We're all full of shit here anyway with our fake screen names and what not. Anyway, you're wrong. King Kong made EXCELLENT numbers in DVD. Not the $400 million or so they wanted, but still. In six days, the King Kong DVD generated over $100 MILLION dollars. In six days. That was a studio record for Universal. So that movie underperformed domestic, but with DVD sales, it became the fourth highest grossing film in Universal history. So what you said about King Kong has proven to be speculative, and therefore your making up numbers to prove your point. Superman Returns does not need a market tie in with anything. You just don't get it obviously, but there's no convincing. Superman is a franchise, and people will buy the DVD. This has nothing to do with how much I liked Superman Returns. This has to do with a little common sense (which means take away your obvious dislike of the movie), proven statistics, etc. This isn't an attack against you. My reference to reading Hollywood Reporter every now and then was said because they list DVD sales all of the time. You'd be surprised what garners $100 million in DVD sales. This week's top DVD, Failure to Launch, will probably make that much. The original X-Men, which was a hit but not as popular as Superman Returns as far as general audience recognition, made $60 million on DVD in its first weekend. So yes, DVD is a POWER HOUSE. DVD is more important to studios then box office gross nowadays. It's their back up. If a film doesn't hit, they know it will on DVD because of the mantality of today's audience. I'm beating a very dead horse, here. Sorry people. Just frustrating when people are so damn stubborn. Nothing but love Kai_Mah'gra. Just a fun debate.
-
In Pirates one and 2 it seems to me that people are dying all over the freaking place. Just none of the main characters.
-
The first time I saw DMC, the first 20 or 30 min seemed a bit dodgy to me. It was just tonally a bit off but beginning with escape from Cannibal Island, the movie was pure bliss. On the SECOND viewing, I didn't have the same problems. I was able to soak in more details of the plot and felt much more comfortable with it. The one thing I was concerned about was that the ending wouldn't be quite as great the second time because I would already know what was going to happen...but somehow, it was even better. First time, I was in disbelief that Jack would be [SPOILER WARNING] killed off...even temporarily. This time, the impact of Elizabeth's action and Jack's acceptance of his fate really hit me. And the return of Barbossa still had me grinning from ear to ear. Oh man, must...stop...jonesing...for...this ...movie...ARRRGGHHHH!!! I'm gonna go have to watch the first one again, lest I spend every cent of my disposable income seeing DMC over and over again.... (yes, I'm a dork, I know).
-
As of now, I've now seen Curse of the Black Pearl three times and Dead Man's Chest twice. Man I love it.
-
you speak from my heart. yet notice how they will ignore you and continue to rant and rave.
Its kinda sad really. -
Did anyone else notice throughout the movie that scenes which had appeared in the trailers...when they happened in the movie, Verbinski used different takes? For the most part, I preferred the trailer versions but Will's reaction to seeing Jack running from the cannibals was much better. "Time to leave." I was actually proud of Bloom in that moment...I knew he had a good line reading in him somewhere. At a boy! Actually, he was much more loose and fun and this is probably one of his best (if not the best) performances. Yeah, I know its not saying much but well... alright that's enough out of me. "Time to leave."
-
(that it's a new era and so forth) and I certainly know about the historical one, but I didn't see how it furthered the plot at all besides being an annoying side track and confusing the motivations of the main characters. If the movie was trimmed (and by god, it should have been), I think most of that stuff could be cut without losing anything from the film. And that heart thing is still confusing. So you can control DJ if you have the heart, simply by threatening to kill him? WTF? So somehow, the EITC is going to force Davy Jones to use the Kraken against his enemies? Couldn't he just send his minions or the Kraken to retrieve the heart and be done with it? And was there any indication that the EITC knew there was any connection between DJ and the Kraken? And if Davy Jones is cursed, wouldn't he welcome the opportunity to die and be released from the curse and finally be at peace, or is it more of a fear of hellfire and damnation and all that. But then again, isn't he in hell now? Like
I said, convoluted. You just can't think too hard about it. Besides, plot is not the main point of these films. Johnny Depp's performance and big visuals is the point. Film candy. But that's it. I think I have a stomach ache. -
Jul 10, 2006 2:56:13 PM CDT
Couldn't he just send his minions or the Kraken to retr
by engineer_at_peac
ieve the heart and be done with it? Well, I don't think that would be a very good idea, considering the person with the heart just has to stab it and you die. Also, DJ isn't cursed. He's utterly free and utterly amoral thanks to his removing of his own heart.
-
Greetings
I have to chime in here and give a hearty "Yo Ho" to Pirates of the Carribean, Dead Man's Chest.
Seriously, my favorite movie in a long while...I LOVED the first one and now I am trying to get out to see this movie AGAIN. Such amazing adventure and fun! So much to praise and so much to love.
The Creatures:
Ok, Davey Jones is an AMAZING bit of character creation. I don't want to call him CGI, as it was certainly Bill Nighy acting there. You can see it! And on set, there was Bill in his skin tight green unitard covered in little lights....acting and interacting with all.
The crew of the Flying Dutchman was nothing short of amazing! Just a grotesque managere of sea-monsters and creatures. It was eye-candy to the extreme....there was so much to see...and during the Davey Jones scenes, my reaction was generally "Look at that one!" and "OOooooh look look! Ugh...what is THAT thing?"
Ragetti and Pintel:
The two villianous but strangely likable Pirates from the first movie are back...and just a treat. They work so well against each other and setting them in any background and intertwined with other characters just make them shine. Ragetti (the one with the wooden eye) is the softer gentler one, but make no mistake...he's a Pirate, and like his rugged and un-hygenic partner Pintel....can really pour on the creepy threats. "Hel-lo Poppet!"
Jack Sparrow....(er sorry) CAPTAIN Jack Sparrow:
Well, it's is film through and through. Rougish and cowardly, and dashing and brave...he's a treat to watch. There is no doubt in my mind why his crew follow him. I would. There's something about the man that makes you trust him, when obviously, you shouldn't. Oh he's a villain as well...but as a Pirate, that's to be expected isn't it?
"Savy?"
Really, this film is what Empire Strikes Back was to the Star Wars trilogy. It was simply, amazing and FUN...and like the long wait for Return of the Jedi...I'll be watching the high seas expectantly for the next one.
And YES...Barbossa's appearance got a BIG pop of a suprise and in my theatre, thunderous applause and cheers errupted. (lead by myself).
In retrospect, there is a great HINT earlier on in the film in Tia's shack as the Monkey jumps up on the prone boots of an off-screen person...AND Jack Sparrow picks up Barbossa's hat for a second and puts it down!
-Prof. Griffin
-
F-U-C-K-I-N-G. Okay, so Sparrow is Han Solo, and boring-ass, milquetoast Will is Luke Skywalker (Yes, I am aware these comparisons have already been made at length.). So I'm thinkin' we're in for an actual, for-real love triangle in No. 3 ... After all, the romance between Cap'n Jack and Lizzy has been brewing since they were stuck on that island together, and now she's starting to realize how fucking cool he is. Anyway, here's to them coupling off in Land's End, even though it'll piss off your mom and sis because Will and Elizabeth knew each other since they were kids and are "meant to be". Fuck that.
-
Yow.
-
With another 300k on saturday, this thing would have the record for each of those three days.
-
It was only off by 3m
-
{singing the pirates of the caribbean theme song}yo-ho,yo-ho,it was a ton of fun. the special effects, the great acting, it was kick-ass, yo-ho...ok, i'm gonna stop that now. seriously it was a very fun, thrilling, feel-good, feel-bad, kick ass summer popcorn blockbuster. i ab"soul-loot"ly loved it from start to finish. it was more fun, endearing, involving and slightly better than the first movie. i wouldn't say it was "funny" but it had a lot of laughs. {spoilers} barbossa's big return at the last 6 seconds will make people want to see the third one next year, hands down and everyone in the theater litterally SHIT THEMSELVES when geoffery rush re-appeared to lead will,liz,molly,pinto and the other douchbags to get jack's soul back at the end of the world along with keith fucking richards. so excited for that and the simpsons movie next july 27! wow. i still have to wait another 2 fucking weeks to see cars because of my fucking stupid idea to wait and see it in theaters after getting all the cars merch with "a bunch of kiddies" at my summer camp on this fucking beach. {more spoilers} and jack had a good re-entry when he shot the bird to get out of the coffin. i held off on the first one on dvd, but i definetly need to get the dvd for the second one when it comes out. everything else just plain "ruled with fun" although my posse last night thought it was stupid. fuck that. i hope that this really isn't the last "big movie of this summer" because we are only at the 26-day mark and we have the ricky bobby flick, miami vice, silent dragon and other good stuff so let's continue to be satisfied here. thanx. peace.
-
Jul 10, 2006 3:52:10 PM CDT
DAMMIT. I have to share this quote from another board:
by engineer_at_peac
"is bill nye the science guy really davey jones?"
-
Jul 10, 2006 4:07:44 PM CDT
Right about now POTC2 is passing Superman Returns...
by excaliburffolkes
...in total domestic box office. Pretty fascinating.
-
Second movie ive walked out on in all my life. The first was Backdraft. It was so convuluted it was not possible to simply enjoy.
-
So - one question... Why was the first Kraken attack - on the ship that accidentally nabbed Jack's Hat... a sort of instant "here's a ship... here are bubbles... splash... no ship" thing... no gynormous tentacles, stinky breath, sharp teeth like the monster in the sand dunes in Return of the Jedi...
But when it attacks the ship with Orlando bloom -- and the perl later (twice... three times... whatever)... it's a whole... Oh no! Bubbles... Tentacles! More tentacles! Stinky breath! Aggh!Time to load cannons... etc etc.?
Is it just cos it looks different from on board than as an observer - like the Matrix thing where time slows down and they're dodging bullets?
-
It was just a tiny fishing dinghy. A Karaken could just but its sucker on the bottom and pull. The other ones needed some tearing up first.
-
Get a grip.
-
is extremely low, especially for a movie so front-loaded to the Friday. The Sat-to-Sun decline for POTC was actually less than that of SR...should've been the exact opposite. Three words, people: word of mouth. This one's gonna be huge.
-
who gives a rat's patooty...who get's boners outta BO take???
-
Talkbackers get the boners, and so do the studio execs who trick fans into this rediculous kind of loyalty.
-
That's a pun right? I like that. Funny.
:) -
There, I have now descended the talkback to a new level of hell. There be monsters here.
-
"prada" is closing on "the break-up" in $ take......boner
-
priceless
-
God, that was a terrible film. Yes, there were a couple cute moments, but overall it was just DUMB...too zany and silly and too long...spent so much time just treading over the same ground. It really got boring after a while. Capt. Jack is just an idiot...never were we shown that he might have some sign of intelligence that would explain why anyone would follow him. Instead, we get 2 1/2 hrs. of him stumbling around acting like a complete clod. Keira Knightly is quite attractive, but her character was just a ditz! What was up with all that stumbling around on the beach, gesticulating, over-acting, etc.?!?! Just terrible! My wife and I were bored and ready for the movie to end. The easter egg at the film's end was a complete and utter waste of time...the movie was just bad. We both give it about 2 stars. Also, the villain was a joke - terrible accent, hard to understand at some points and not the least bit scary as the villain was in the first film. Good ending, but the movie was THE #1 disappointment of the summer.
-
ahem... I know this is POTC TB which was great. But since SR keeps coming up I want to keep people honest because I've noticed some hyperbole. SR is not tanking at the BO. saying it doesn't make it so. The movie has been out for ten days folks and it has generated $160 + mil world wide ($140 US) it's been out for less then two weeks. On this past weekend when the now highest grossing opening weekend POTC it theaters SR still made $21mil. time to stop the "it's tanking " talk. Unless you work for a competing studio, you should be smarter then this. Come on boys and girls let's talk movies not trash them. Peace
-
Youre right--I did say that Superman only earned as much as Star Trek. I'm not sure what I was thinking at the time, but it is wrong. I appologize. As far as Batman is concerned, the 150 million price tag was off the top of my head from newspaper/magazine articles that I had read qutie some time ago. I remember reading that after Nicholson got his 60 or 70 million dollars from Batman, Burton, the producers, Prince, and a couple others had taken their pay that was based on gross earnings, the movie costed about 150 (give or take). This did not, however, include the advertising costs, which were substantial at the time. Again, I realize that the movie technically made 50 million profit, but when balanced against advertising, a chunk was taken out of that. Granted, for some reason I remembered the film earning like 350 million rather than 400 million, but in the end, your only talking a small portion of proffit from a film that pulled a huge chunk of dough. And you can quibble over details (which I freely admit that I was off on) all you want, but the fact remains that my ultimate point still stands: the real profit, for the studio, from Batman came in the form of merchandising. Now, upon hearing that my recollection of Superman's original earnings was wrong and that Batman did actually earn a small proffit theatrically, you could have actually POLITELY said, "hey moondoggy, youre actually wrong--star trek wasnt as successful as you thought and batman did actually earn a small profit." Of course, that would be asking a bit too much, huh? And the ultimate point that was being made wasnt that batman was a failure or that star trek was only as successful as superman, but that a studio's real profits come from merchandising. Feel free to continue acting like an obtuse, abrassive little dweeb and bust my balls over minor details that didnt really matter compared to the larger debate at hand;)
-
Why not send the Kraken to get the heart? Because the Kraken has no authority on land, only in the ocean - it's a demigod confined to a particular realm. The chest was on land. The Kraken was persuing them again once they were in the water. DJ DID send his minions to get the heart, but only out of desperation. DJ kept it in a secret place from everyone. As it was mentioned, DJ cut out his own heart, so clearly he is not looking to be "set free". The EITC head knows about DJ and the heart. Now, he may or may not know about him controlling the Kraken, but one suspects he does since he knows all kinds of things you'd never expect the head of the EITC to know. Clearly, there is more to this guy than meets the eye - perhaps he is a demon or has been to the End of the World himself (he reminds me of the Buffy Big Bad type of villain who looks normal, but is really some Cthulian demonic force). Also, it's clear from the response of Norrington, that everyone has heard of the Kraken, DJ, etc., so it's not like it's a BIG SECRET. All of these things are painfully obvious in the film.
-
I didnt refer to all the star trek movies not making a prophet, as you insinuated in your first post, but to there not being a star trek 6 after the debacle of star trek 5 and no star trek 2 after the low profits of star trek 1. And by the way, I FINALLY found the post in which I said star trek was only as profitable as Superman. Okay, Superman was waaayyy more profitable than what I recall. But that is still doesnt take away the fact that Star Trek 1 wasnt very profitable for paramount, does it? Jesus christ, you little troll, you got your panties all twisted up over a throw-away line that mistakenly compared the movie to a much more successful movie when it had nothing to do with the ultimate point. Goddamn, minderbinder, and you want to tell me to get my head out of my ass? I reitterate, go sit in the kiddies table and let the grownups talk about the important stuff; you're just making an ass out of yourself.
-
You keep listing off movies that were hits that you keep insisting made little or no profit. You're wrong, and you continue to be wrong. You've made these claims on other talkbacks and people have corrected you, but you continue to post wrong information. And yes, I will continue to bust your balls over MAJOR wrong info that you keep posting. You STILL instist that Batman, a movie that cost $35M and made $400M+ worldwide only made a small profit? Did you get dropped on your head as a child or something?
-
Jack Sparrow's compass pointed not at the lovely lass, but to the Kraken in the sea behind her. Where, in its gullet, lay Jack's one true love: His Hat.
-
The movie didnt cost 35 million to make, minder. That was its initial production budget, yes. But as you know, Jack Nicholson had a big percentage of the gross and walked away with something like a 75 million dollar paycheck as a result of the film's financial earnings. That immediately puts the film's price tag to that of 110 mil. Then when you add Burton's percentage, the producer's percentage, Prince's percentage, etc. the film costed about 150 million (quite possibly more) and that is BEFORE merchandising. The studios either broke even ore barely made a proffit, minder. End of story.
-
Give me a break. You've listed like ten movies that made money and insisted they were flops. Sorry, but I'm not going to let that slide. If you're going to claim that my pointing out that a movie that cost $35M and made $400M made more than a small profit, so be it. My posts stand for themselves, call names all you want. The facts are on my side, period. By the way, you might want to check out a website called boxofficemojo.com. It has info on virtually every movie, might save you some embarrasment in the future.
-
You know, if I were Sparrow and that kraken were after me, you better believe my greatest love would be some dry land--thats where that compass would be swinging to every time.
-
(which you don't have anything to back up), and even if the studio only got half of the $400M international (probably got more), that's 50M in profit just from the theatrical release. That's "breaking even or barely making a profit"? I can't believe I'm even having this discussion, it's like talking to a lunatic who keeps insisting that the sky is orange.
-
Your very first post was filled with venom at a couple of innocent mistakes that had no real bearing or context to the larger discussion. Sounds like trollish behavior to me. I admit, I probably shouldnt have copped an attitude back at you, but you did seem to be a lot more hateful than you needed to be. And as for being too lazy to look back at my posts, youre damn right I'm too lazy! I can barely remember what I had for lunch let alone a comment in some post out of the few dozen posts I've made on this thread alone! I'm just too scared to slog through this thread all over again;)
-
You're making a big deal over 50 million or less profit when the larger point that was being made THROUGHOUT THIS THREAD BY ME was that the studio's real earnings are from merchandising and not a theatrical release. Lets say for argument that the film was 100% pure profit. Every single dollar, every last one, was profit for the studio. That would still only amount to HALF of what merchandising did for Batman, to say nothing of rentals, and other stuff. Okay? do you understand why I feel you're quibbling? I mean, I'm not saying that you werent right or that I wasn't wrong, I'm simply saying that those were minor details to my larger point and you could have shown a bit more finesse in correcting me rather than act like some prepubescent kid who fervently cries out,"I got you!" Thats kinda why I called you a troll, minder.
-
I know people will flame me for this but at least with King Kong you can see where the money went...sure there were a couple of ropey effects but in general the film looked gigantic....I for the life of me cannot see where singer spent 200 million + on superman...the effects were servicable..sets were nice but over 200 million? I just can't see it.
and to the guy who said sr is not tanking. yes. yes it is. When compared to its astronomical budget it is. studios don't make films like superman to break even or make a small profit...they make them to make tons of cash and I am sorry but it can no longer be spun into anything other than the disaster story it is. warners will be in a state of depression about the year so far anmd the only thing keeping them afloat will be the fact they have another potter film next year...2 huge budget films have stiffed on them..this isn't 2 low budget films underforming..this is 2 gigantic budget films failing.
for the record I fucking loved superman...LOVED it and it hurts me to think there will not be a sequel but I really don't think one will be on the cards....I said this yesterday do you really think there is any executive at warners willing to bring up sequel plans right now? no chance...they would either be laughed at hysterically or fired on the spot....... -
Don't worry, I aint gonna flame you. I totally agree about Kong's effects being great. Despite my comment over his lack of discipline, his effects did look great and expensive (which they most certainly were). How did Singer spend his dough? Well, he took like six months on principle photography for something that should have only taken a month or so to film. Than he completely blows about 15 million or more on effects that were edited out or completely covered up. And as far as a sequel is concerned, let me put it this way, Slappy. Lets say you were the head of WB. Lets also assume that Supermans just breaks even, okay? Anyway, your film that you invested your money in brought you 1.4 ish billion dollars in revenue. It also completely returned your investment on its theatrical release by breaking even. Furthermore, the film stands to gan between 150 and 200 million dollars in DVD sales. Now, if offered a chance, would you invest in said film again?
-
I'm not saying that you wouldnt want some improvements to the next film, but you have to admit, you'd want to invest in yet another movie that would bring in that much dough, wouldnt you? Of course, on the flip side, you'd probably get less merchandising on account of your film only doing Batman Begins business and not Spiderman business (and make no mistake, theres a big difference between the two), but it would still be a pretty profitable venture.
-
There's a good chance that Singer is going to be fired from this: it was his directing that caused this, after all, and no one else's fault that this film is having more problems than what it should. However, I'd imagine Singer would keep his job so long as he signs in blood that he'd spice up the script and watch his budget more carefully. Again, if Supes were only the 160 or 180 mil flick it was supposed to be, none of us would be sitting here bitching about or defending the term underperformance. Instead, we'd be saying, "hot damn, the film earned will deffinitely be a profit on its theatrical release," and thus, no negative publicity.
-
Domestically speaking, Superman has made 75% of the money it took three months for King Kong to earn in a little less than 2 weeks.
-
Before the Spiderman movies, there was maybe half a dozen SKU's of Spiderman product in a Wal-Mart toy section. Today, there is 4 to 8 feet of shelf space -- and there is not even a current movie in circulation. Same song for Fantastic Four, X-Men, etc. NOW there will be 4 to 8 ft. of Superman merchandise in a Wal-Mart store. Now extend that same dynamic into beach towels, mugs, lunch boxes -- you name it. Any idea how much $$$ that equates to? I'll tell you how much -- enough to equal two more Superman movies, easy -- THAT'S how much.
-
What sports are you into? I'm a football fan, myself. Just 2 more months!!!
-
waayyy back when. What team do you root for, might I ask? I appear to be the only 49'ers fan in all of Buffalo (big surprise).
-
.....talkbackers also has the audacity to call them "Trolls". Hypocritical idiot thy name be moondoggy2u.
-
Wow! POTC2 beat all expectations. Everybody believed it was going to make 132million this weekend. It actually surpassed that with 135 million as its final take. You don't see that too often.
-
And yes, Plummer chokes. Buuut he's the best QB we've had since Elway. Of course that's not saying all that much. *sigh*
-
I've been a Niners fan since Montana. `Course, back then, the team was a winning team;)
-
This IS the best talkback ever. How did the Broncos get into this? LOL. For the record, Packer fan all the way. Packers vs. Broncos Superbowl was one of the all-time best ever. And I'll admit, it was great seeing Elway win. We won the year before so...
But about SR sequels. We're ping ponging this one, but WB will be talking sequel after the summer. However, they will be saying, "Okay, how do we make a better sequel for less money?" Slappy Jones, you gotta understand the studio system. They need the franchises. It was a good start but not the breakout they wanted. But there will be sequel plans. They live and breath tentpole flicks. Bread and butter. They'll problem solve and the executives will say, "Whatever you gotta do to fix it, fucking fix it because we need these movies!" Studios have pretty much seen that 2.5 hours is too much (look at SR and King Kong...which went way over that). So, they will say, "Alright, no more than two hours long. No more than $200 million, preferably $180 million. More action." They are going to want to get it out in three years, rather than to have to restart the franchise all over again. Plans for Superman Returns 2 were underway well before the release. Yeah, they want to see how it does first... but more importantly, they want to see what went right and what went wrong. Not that this has anything to do with SR... but they made a Superman IV after Superman III didn't they? Yeah, Superman III made a profit, but it did not compare to the first two. And to whoever said that Batman Begins does not have a sequel going????? Wrong. They thankfully aren't going to pull a Schumacher and shit a sequel out in a year and a half. Like they did with BB, they'll DEVELOP it. It takes time. Anyway... back to football:) -
Cause I used to be a Bears fan way back when the Fridge was playing. I was living in Chicago at the time--what can I say?
-
L.A. is just not the same:) Bears vs. Packers. Old school rivalry. Although for our generation Packers vs. Vikings is THE rivalry for us. HATE the Vikings. But I respect the Bears.
-
Like I've said before, Warner Bros. should let Smallville run two more seasons then give it a flick. It it's a hit, you got two ways to go with the franchise, plus you have something to fuel dvd sales. If it fails, by that time the cast of Returns would have aged, and possibly the same kid could be used for a sequel. Whatever they do, THEY NEED TO UPDATE IT, and not make it retro.
-
Jesus Christ Almighty. If that's not the funniest thing I've read in ages then I dont know what it.
-
to Mt Doom!
That is the tag line to the next Superman flick, my sources say it will be called "Superman vs. The Ringlord" -
Jul 11, 2006 3:07:57 AM CDT
a_lobster: "Twice-Cursed Rotting Skeleton Barnacle Man"
by dr_terwilliker
"(With Extra Starfish)"
LOL. is that an award you can get in the Pirate military or something?
I can see the Swift Boat ads when Bootstrap returns and runs for Congress...
"I served with Bootstrap Bill Turner. Bill Turner is no pirate. Bill Turner is no good man.
And his barnacles are self-inflicted." -
Leave the world's most popular sport alone. Why do American's only seem to hate sports they either don't play or stink at. It was a shit world cup. BTW, pantera, the padding thing is a comparison made with Rugby- which no-one with half a brain makes anymore as every professional Rugby player wears padding.
-
In fact it`s pretty hilarous to me seeing people that were so anti-Van Helsing and then praise Pirates 2. You`re telling me, looking into my eyes that this piece of crap I saw yesterday was better than the other overdone flick with crappy CGI monsters? Both were horrible abortions of Cinema. Same intention do go wild and do caper...and missing the point miserably.
-
I want to see it! it would do better box office and be a hell of a lot better reviewed than those POS prequels.
Call it "Empire Strikes Back Redux: Dead Jedi's Chest-(Mounted Life-Support System)."*
(last part in small print to fit on the bill)
That'll cover prequel #2. For a revised, updated Revenge of the Sith, they can turn to LOTR: ROTK... -
"Superman was too cerebal and dull" "POC-DMC was too light hearted and fun" "I suck" Wahhhhh! Pffffffft! If you think you can do better put your money where your mouth(s) are/is
-
Next summer the big smackdown is gonna be over which is better. Spidey 3 or Worlds End. (Talk about opening a can of worms - have at it kiddies and don't be afraid to use your nails)
-
between films that happen to go head-to-head. Like betting on horses. Methinks some of these people are at fine risk for being gambling addicts.
-
although I think thats mainly due to the fact that POTC2 was like one act of a movie only strecthed out and the first hour and a half was really so-so-the whole thing reminded me of matrix revolutions.....I guess whether or not I like this film depends on if all of the questions it raises are answered and if davey jones' character gets developed a bit more. The effects were absolutley stunning, with the exception of the kraken you really could not tell that it was CG..incredible.
-
OK, a bunch of people have already been stating that her true wish is to become a pirate- hence her training with Will, hence the compass pointing to Jack when she has it, hence blah blah blah etc... I think it goes further than that, though. I really believe that in the end these movies are going to turn out to have been Elizabeth's story all along. I can see her bookending the series. She starts out as a young girl of means and upbringing and we start the series with her looking over the water singing "A Pirates Life For Me"... and we'll END the series with her as the captain of her own ship, sailing into the sunset- singing the same tune (also mirroring Jack's closing shots in TCOTBP). It makes the series more dynamic from several angles and it just seems to me where they are heading with it. In fact, I'll be disappointed if that ISN'T what happens.
Oh, and to those calling the ghost dress scene superfluous or a waste of time... You're out of your minds! First of all, it does not take up 15 minutes (which several have claimed) her entire time on that ship takes all of 6-7 minutes of screen time (I just saw it again last night). And regardless of that, it IS important. 1) She needed to get to Tortuga 2) She needed to display her resourcefulness 3) She needed an impetus to get into more Pirate-y garb.
Check the lingering shot after that ship goes down (via the Kraken) of her dress floating to the bottom of the ocean. If that isn't symbolic of the end of her old life as MISS ELIZABETH SWANN, governor's daughter... then I don't know what is. And as to why her travels got more screen time than Will's... well, back to my original point. This is ELIZABETH'S story. -
Someone at Disney is quick on the trigger. The pages appeared here.
http://imdb.com/title/tt0449088/board/thread/47904085
Now they're all history! Somebody out there must have this motherfucker! Host and Post! -
buccaneers in the end, I bet. A legal pirate. :) Elisabeth IS the key character, which is why I compared her to Luke Skywalker, instead of Princess Leia. Will is Princess Leia. Ha.
-
So, did anyone else get that Transformers Teaser Trailer during their showing of Pirates? My Audience did. It was awesome, not the trailer, but the audience. In what I would call the most diverse audience I have ever seen the applauded when the Transformers name came up. Then abrubtly stopped and gave a collective "Awww!" When Bay's name appeared. It was like watching a child take it's first steps and then proceed to fall down a flight of stairs. That kind of "Aww Crap, Aww". Also, to clarify diversity of audience, we had not one person wearing a jollly roger t-shirt or dressed up, a girls basket ball team, kids, adults, teens, and a couple who desperately tried to have sex during the film. We even had people who were here from Germany. Yup. Totally average people, who apparently love the idea of Transformers, but know that Micheal Bay will screw it up.
-
Transformers popped up--crowd was filled with "oh wow!" and "cool!" and "I'm gonna see that!" And then the next moment, Bay's name popped up and you litterally heard about two dozen people jeering and a whole lotta steam being let out. Weirdest reaction I've ever seen. Understandable, but weird nonethelss.
-
If so much money is made from toys and such, and if the toys sell even when there's no movie out, why bother to make a sequel? Just sell the toys. If you are going to make a sequel with the intention of not making money on the movie, might as well wait as long as possible between movies and make the movie as dirt cheaply as possible. Why get a real director when any fool can direct your 2.5 hour toy commercial? And while you're at it, why not just go straight to video like Disney does and aim it at children?
-
the funniest thing I have read in quite some time....priceless
-
And I think the trilogy overall will be about her being torn between being prim and proper and going out galavanting on the high seas - is she a good person overall or deep down inside is she as selfish as Jack? Jack can't really have a character arc, he's really just an anarchist who has no loyalties whatsoever. He's not a hero, he's not really "a good man" even though the crew keeps saying that, he has situational ethics. It's not right or wrong, it's that actions have consequences and what consequences are acceptable ones? Also, he's generally in situations where there's no way out without "cheating" or fighting dirty, desperate times call for desperate measures (by any means necessar). I bet Elizabeth's situation gets WAY darker before everything is resolved, I could totally see her becoming a full-on pirate.
-
Hey, I've seen and have engaged you in other TBs. The least I can say about you is that you are driven, you definately have a breadth of ability to site "facts" But not to actually listen to the others response (really am not insulting you). I have said I don't wish to get involved with these "wars" but I am convinced now that it's not about real dabate but "crush those with opposing view points". Assume multible screen names and hop around bashing. The thing with you is you do it so well I can't tell whether you actual believe the stuff you spew. You have not (as far as I've seen) sighted what movies you do like but only what you hate and what sucks. One last thing, in a post above you stated "SR is struggling to make $200 Mil. by what standards are you basing that? It's been out for 11 days, is that abnormal for a movie not to gross $200? Many here are fond of stating "yeah but the movie cost blah blah blah to make" That's only relevant to the studios profit, which from what iv'e seen is not the main argument in the TBs. That argument would be whether or not the geneal public considers the movie a flop and I must say $177,000,000 world wide in 11 days proves otherwise. Now before you "smack me down" consider, am I wrong or do I have a valid point? oh yeah have you seen POTC?
-
Had the same experience...I didn't know that mainstream could associate Micheal Bay and his work.
-
I think the bi polar aspects of her character in this movie too are a strong manipulation of the audience. She's a non-entity as MISS ELIZABETH SWANN, but she is cheered and booed as the girl who managed to trick an EITC ship into changing course, to engage fishy crabby pirates in swordplay, to scare Lord Beckett into (heh) acquiescing to her requests, to manipulate the master manipulator, Jack Sparrow etc... And I think there was a strong balance betwwen the two sides of her. This is making us WANT her to go that way... That along with the simplicity of her seaworthy stowaway garb (and it being much more in line with her swashing and buckling in the last hour) and the strength of seeing her dress sink in the ocean (to say nothing of having clearer motivations where the means to reach her goals may become progressively more shaky morally) It just all adds up to a much smoother character arc than say... Anakin Skywalker turning to the dark side.
-
Based on SR's performance so far (especially the rate at chich the numbers are dropping), it looks unlikely to go much beyond $200M by the end of it's run. Generally, that's a great number, but when the movie cost $260M it's obviously a disappointment (I'd agree that "flop" isn't really the right term). The relevance of that to the fans is that the profitability (not the overall gross) is probably the biggest factor in whether there will be a sequel. For the record, in this case I think it's possible WB will make a sequel after a few years but with a very scaled back budget. What big money losers have had sequels made?
-
I not a girl, just a person with a personal dislike for the direction they took with Elizabeth's character. Now that they made it obvious in DMC, I should have seen it in CotBP. She's falling for the "bad boy" thinking that there is something there for her to redeem and change. It's stereotypical young girl bull shit. I get tired of hearing women complain about how badly they get treated when they screw over the nice guy for the bad boy. The writers here are perpetuating that. Everything Will has done he did for her. She stole his medallion, lied about her name, not to mention all that Will went through in this film to try and save her. Yet she is one step away from screwing the first guy who looks at her the right way and she screws Will over in the end. If not for his father, if I were Will, I'd walk away from this and her. Now the idealistic will say that she started making out with Sparrow to chain him to the boat. That was just an excuse. This film does not need a love triangle. It was good the way it was.
-
The only answer I can come up with, and its just a guess, is that some productions do exactly what you described. Fantastic Four, The shumacher (sp) bat flicks. Those were really toyetic and really heavy on the pitches. Remember, merchandising isnt just toys, those are just the most obvious ones for these kinds of flims. Remember the bat credit card add that was in one of the batflicks, something to do with takeout or something? Im sure there are a slew of other examples, but im a little too busy to research it. As with the case of Batman, Spiderman, and Superman, whoever was funding the movie felt pretty strongly about the project and wanted to make the best one possible: enter singer for supes, nolan for bats, etc. And I think youre right: a film's performance and perception does matter. If no one goes to see a film, there's no way companies will pay a studio to slap movie logos on their stuff. My question is, are companies really caring about how much profit a studio earns when a film is obviously able to generate a few hundred million ticket sales (for sake of argument, just assume supes sells that many). Anywho, thats my two cents on it, anyway.
-
and out of those productions, how many of those films were zealously and respectfully backed by production studios? I remember hearing that Sam Raimi had to fight Sony tooth and nail to treat Spiderman with respect and not as just some kids movie. And we all know how Fox treated the X-men franchise from day one. Ditto on WB's comic movies (until the Batman Begins and Supe Returns). A lot of these tentpole productions ARE despised and ridiculed by the studios that fund them, and are nearly always slapped together by whatever director is willing to do it (Take Transformers as another example of this). Im sure the studios are interested in the film being successful, in so much as that provides the best selling pitch for merchandising costs.
-
You bring up some good points, but there are a few I have to disagree on. I would think it would a huge mistake for this to be Elizabeth's story in the end. The sudience doesn't go to see Elizabeth, they go to see Sparrow and Johnny Depp. Jack may not be a good man in the complete moral sense, but he loyal even if it doesn't appear that way until the end. He may not do right by the letter of the law, but by friendship he seems to always do the right thing. In the first film, it appeared that he sold Will out to Barbosa, but in the end he had a plan all along and it did not include sacrificing Will to get his ship back. If he is guilty of anything, it is not sharing his plans. Of course that's what makes these films fun is seeing how they all turn out. What is there to root for in Elizabeth? We want to root for her to become a pirate? The difference between her and Jack is that she manipulates people to her own end with no regard for how it effects them in the end. Jack would have got Will out of the trouble he put him in, but what did Elizabeth do for Norrington? Not a damn thing and she didn't go out of her way to save Will because it was right. She seems to have done it because she caused most of it and because she thought she wanted him though she drug him along long enough. Now with what she did to Will in her efforts to chain Jack to the ship. I don't see her as a hero anymore. She's a tease who doesn't know what she wants or what's good for her. Either that or the writers are changing the story to suit the audiences who seem to like Jack better than Will. Either way she comes off as slutty and a tease.
-
way back to superninja. Ok, I'm gonna cut you some slack now since you're a Buffy fan. But I can't imagine the end of your last post wasn't meant ironically, when your attempt at explanation was as convoluted as the film. Yes, the nonsensical plot is painfully obvious! Basically, when it comes down to it, the heart and all that mess was just an overly complicated maguffin to get some pirates fighting. Very weak writing, in my opinion. Now all this discussion about Elizabeth's character arc is interesting and I wish I could have gone with that, but there's just nothing in these films to make me care about her (or really any other) character. I still maintain the action and effects are enjoyable and made the film worthwhile in the theater, but there's just not much more to it. POTC is no Indiana Jones, that's for sure. I rooted for Indiana Jones - he was the hero. I was rooting more for the bad guys in POTC.
-
I agree to a point on the dissapointment as far as profit (from movie gross only) but I think the movie will cover the $260 price tag and license and merchandice will be gravy. I also don't think $21 million on a second weekend (when POTC is opening no less) is dropping. I am really curious as to what it will do this weekend, I know quite a few people who haven't seen it yet but really want to. (If that's any indication of others).
-
I don't think that is the issue here. It isn't about screwing over the good boy to get the bad boy. It's about her getting what SHE wants. Period. Is she indebted to Will for what he's done for her? Sure. Does that however mean that she has to force herslef to remain in love with him? Absolutely not. That's like saying Ducky should have ended up with Andie in Pretty In Pink... which in a idealized world MIGHT seem like the "right" thing, but it just isn't. Yes he loves her, yes they have much in common and years behind them and he'd do anything for her... but the truth is that he is needy, has an almost creepy one track mind in his obsession... and in the end, Andie cannot MAKE herslef feel that way about it him. Same with Will and Elizabeth. It's not malice to follow ones own heart over another's... it's human. (and this is all assuming that she winds up not with Will in the end anyway)
-
well...technically it's "dropping" i was relatively speaking. peace!
-
WTF? Did you see the same movie I saw? How is Elizabeth more irresponsible and manipulative than Jack? Jack had no plan that he didn't share. He would have left all the men, including Will on the cannibal island, and if it meant saving his skin, he would have left Will with Davy Jones. There was no plan to retrieve him. The only indication we have of redeeming heroic qualities, is when he goes back at the end. But one heroic act out of guilt does not make him any less a shit who would sell out his "friends" at the first opportunity. I love how when Jack plays people, he's an admirable scallywag, but when Elizabeth does it, she's a scheming bitch or a whore. The double standard lives on.
-
I think in the end she'd resigned herself to Jack's fate at that point and that his fate would be THEIR fate as well if they didn't distance themselves from him. After his own manipulations (and perceived) double crossings even though she DOES have reverance for him (if not feelings)... she's also still royally pissed. However that reverance comes through in her wish to have Jack's (seemingly) inevitable death... come with honor and nobility, even if only in the eyes of his crew and even if she has to force him into it.
-
you cant deny that Sparrow and Elizabeth, just as they did in the first movie, had ten times the chemistry than Orlando and Kneightly. Of course, my half-eaten bowle of Cinamon Toast Crunch has more chemistry than Bloom, but still...
-
POTC:DMC has $154 mil after 4 days; SR $144 after 13 days. DMC made as much on its first Monday as SR did on its opening day (minus previews).
-
Your #s are a little off, it has made $182,270,554 world wide $136 domestic. SR is $144 domestic. (boxofficemojo). Besides it's a marathon not a sprint. Time will tell time will tell. peace.
-
I'd like to ask first how the fact that everything Elizabeth does is all about her and what she wants makes her a sympathetic character. It seems to me like she is selfish. This is what makes her worse than Jack, in my mind at least. Where is th proof that Jack would have left those men on that cannibal island if it meant saving his own neck. Where has he done anything in either film that proves that he would do that? What I have seen is that even if we aren't aware of it, Jack has a plan not only to get what he wants, but to make sure his firends get what they want. Did he not keep telling Will all through the first movie to wait for the opportune moment to strike when Will was rash and headstrong despite everything he did that appeared to be to the contrary? And did he not, in the end, after everything Will tried to do to mess up the plan, give Will the means to free himself and save Elizabeth? There is no arguing that Jack wants to get whatever it is he wants, but he seems to make sure that everyone else is getting what they want too. That's where he differs from Elizabeth. She wants what she wants and to hell with anyone else. As for Will being too needy, well I don't see it. I see maybe someone who is a bit emotionally immature. This love triangle did strike a personal cord with me because I have seen it happen too many times and everytime the giurl then whines about it. In my ideal thrid film, Will would find a bit of strength and cast her off. She's not worth it in my mind.
-
as it helps himself. He didn't betray Will in the first film because it was convenient. There was no advantage to doing otherwise. Jack is always one step ahead of everyone in the first film. In this film he is running (from everything) and it finally catches up with him. He stops running, that's all. Which was his only moral choice to date, and one he was forced into by Elisabeth.
-
http://www.tmz.com/2006/07/10/exclusive-super-200-million-man-or-else/
-
bit at the end, but no, I don't think it's overly convoluted or bad writing. After watching it, I kind of wondered if DuPont had seen the same film. He confusion was much more complicated than anything the plot suggested. If you don't care about any of the characters, I understand the disinterest on your part.
-
I don't know if it was his only moral choice. He did save Elizabeth's life at the start of the first. Please be clear though, I am not saying that Jack is perfect. All I'm saying is that he is more sympathetic than Elizabeth and maybe even more moral than she is.
-
But normally licensing and DVD are gravy, not money required to pay off the initial investment. There's no question, studios always have the goal of breaking even domestically and are disappointed if that doesn't happen. One thing that's rarely mentioned is that movies are generally made with borrowed money - the longer it takes to break even, the more interest is paid, which eats away at profits even more. JohnGalt - where did you get a monday number? I can't find it on any of the usual sites.
-
Okay, that's an exaggeration. In the first film, Elisabeth is entirely more moral than Jack. In this film, she is struggling with being selfish and with doing what is right (which Will is through and through- I wonder if that will change?) and doing whatever she wants (like Jack does). However, all Elisabeth did by manipulating Jack was to give him a taste of his own medicine, and make him own up to his responsibilities which was putting everyone else in danger of losing their life. While unkind (because he is nearly in love with her, as much as Jack can love anyone other than Jack) and manipulative, Jack was the one putting everyone in danger from the start. You seem to be forgetting, all of this was about Elisabeth was trying to save Will's life in the first place.
-
was when he went back to the ship. That's it. Up until that point, Jack had been engaging in situational ethics, as mindbender pointed out. And even then, Jack would've probably left in the longboat with them if Elisabeth had not decieved him. I will give you that this does paint Jack as momentarily more sympathetic, but that is intentional. It's supposed to make you wonder if Elisabeth will go pirate (like Anakin Skywalker going DV). However, since by the end of the film Elisabeth agrees to go GET Jack in Pt3, it's obvious that she feels guilty about what she did.
-
is near impossible for me, since I don't remember a thing from it (which is the point I'm making about these being forgettable, popcorn films). So all I'm going on is Jack's behavior in THIS film, and it's clear to me that his only motivation throughout is to save his own skin. It's only through Elizabeth's eyes (when she thinks he's a good man deep down) that we see anything redeeming about him (besides his sheer entertainment value - kinda like the movie). So we're actually in agreement here, superninja. At least about the characters. Huh.
-
But notice also that the immature and selfish Jack is lauded, while the responsible and noble Will is sort of viewed as a tool. Yes, the double standard does indeed live on...
-
Which she wouldn't have needed to try and do if he weren't trying to save her. Jack never asked for Will's help until Will showed up to find him. What does that say? Elizabeth thiunks its her job to try and reform him because she wants him more than she wants Will. That's why I don't like her. She isn't giving Jack a taste of his own medicine to save everyone else. Or at least that's not the only reason.
-
seems like a lothario Peter Pan. I don't think he'll end up with Elisabeth in the end. He will never grow up.
-
I am including the $18 mil it made on Monday (and the $2.7 mil SR made the same day). www.showbizdata.com
-
about anyone but Jack? She doesn't want Jack more than she wants Will. She left Jack to die, genius. She wants what Jack represents, or maybe not. She's not sure yet.
-
Will to pay HIS DEBT to Davey Jones in an eternity of hellish slavery. But you're right, Jack is more moral that Elisabeth. Are you serious, dude?
-
If Jack is so unethical and morally questionable, why is he included as one of the protagonists and heroes? I think what we are dealing with here is two kinds of pirate, both morally questionable, but one infinitely worse than the other. Rooting for Jack is like rooting for the thieves in Ocean's 11. We're supposed to find them symnpathetic despite their moral shortcomings. You want to go for straight good then Will is the hero, but how many here are going to back him? A handful if that? I don't know why you want to root for ELizabeth to go pirate, that means she becomes morally ambiguous. I still say when you put Jack up against Elizabeth in a battle of morals it is either a draw or Jack wins by a lsim margin just by virtue of his "sitational ethics" as you call it. Elizabeth is a selfish girl. This is not a knock on Knightly since she is only playing what is written. I liked the Elizabeth of the last film, willing to get a little dirty to do what is right. Now she seems more about getting dirty to get dirty. It's no longer about what is right, it is about her desires more than anything else. If she feels guilty at the end, she should. She condemned Jack, not just to save the crew, but to force him to conform to her vision of what he should be. If she becomes full on pirate, going to the darkside ala Anakin Skywalker, she is no longer a hero, but a villain. I don't want to see that happen.
-
SuperNinja is right. Or at least I agree.
I don't think Elizabeth has done ANYTHING that is entirely self serving... Jack has.
I may be missing something, but where has she done anything that was strictly for her own ends and not for the ends of Will, Jack or others? -
The difference between your perception and mine is that I don't think Jack meant Will to pay his debt. I dont think he ever expected Davy Jones to accept it. He sent Will there to get the key so that Jack could control Davy Jones and then kill him. Remember, Jack did a similar thing to Will in the first film by pretending to give him to Barbosa. He wanted Barbosa dead and he did not want to Will to die too, I think that is obvious in the first film. Thus, I think Jack was playing Jones just like he did Barbosa, biding him time until he could get the heart.
-
Because when Jack sends Will off, I thought he was just hoping Davy Jones would accept Will's soul in exchange for Jack's. But maybe not...clearly Jack is a smart guy and knows that DJ can't be bought off so easily. The end of DMC, and why its so effective, come from these three words from Liz: "I'm not sorry." She could have chained up Sparrow to save the rest but still felt remorse...but no, she wasn't sorry. Or was she just saying that to hide romantic feelings for Jack? Man, I cannot wait for AT WORLD'S END...
-
Elizabeth has done nothing self serving? What about her flirting with Jack? That was not about saving Will, it was about her desires. How about her line to the East India Trading Company guy. When she threatened him, she said nothing about him putting Will in danger it was "You robbed me of my wedding night". Why in this film is she now conning everyone to get what she wants instead of asking for help like she did in the first film? I will be the first to admit that I may be coming down harder of her because of what her actions are doing to Will rather than anything else. Also, what has Jack done that has only benfitted Jack?
-
I think Elizabeth generally tries to do the right thing, up until she tricks Jack. She stole the medalion because she was worried he was a pirate. She gave "Turner" as a last name because she mistakenly thought that they were after the governor's daughter and merely wanted to disguise her identity - I'm sure using Will's name wasn't a coincidence. I think one of the biggest factors in her change is that she's tired of being the damsel in distress, being saved by others, and wants to take matters into her own hands. When she flirts with Jack and then kisses him, I totally saw it as manipulation, not doing it because she's interested in Jack (although she seems to be surprised when she has a bit of a spark on kissing him). She's not a slut, she's just using all available options, not to mention that she only does that in the most dire of situations - by kissing Jack, she's saving the lives of ALL the remaining crew, including Will. And even then, she's visibly reluctant to see Jack die, but it's the only way to guarantee their safety. I don't think she's attracted to Jack, she's attracted to the freedom of the pirate way of life, especially after her years in a corset (literaly and figuratively). The third movie will be less of a love triangle and more of a moral dilemma - I think the Anakin comparison is an apt one, although that was "good vs evil" and this is more "rules vs anarchy". Jack sometimes seems heroic, but he only does the "good" thing when it's to his personal advantage. He leaves his crew to be eaten (and most of them die), he sends Will off to Davey Jones with no plan of rescue. The only selfless acts I can think of are saving Elizabeth at their first meeting (which really didn't risk his life at all, and he likely didn't know hed' be recognized and captured) and turning back in the rowboat to face the Kraken. The ending really is a big twist because Elizabeth and Jack both have big shifts in character, they almost switch moral positions. There's an interesting inteview on boxofficemojo.com - the writers say they're not interested in making characters likable, they'd rather have them interesting (and I assume complex and unpredictable). We don't necessarily always root for Elizabeth (or any one character). Oisin, this movie is NOT like raiders, which had simplistic good versus evil. The whole point of these movies is the moral ambiguity - in many cases the pirates are the heroes and the government is the bad guy. We DO root for the bad guys, although there are no real good and bad guys, just shades of grey. Gotta love when a Disney movie has anti-heroes and subverts the conventions of good and evil.
-
I think that's what people are supposed to think and I also believe that this is the one place where Elizabeth is right. Jack is a good man. No one mentions his agreeing to sacrifice his beloved Black Pearl to escape the Kraken before he almost ran away. This is also why these pirates are more sympathetic than all the others in the film. They do help each other despite all the talking about Codes
-
I can see most of what you are saying, then only thing I disagree with is your assertion that Jack had no plan of rescue for Will in the hands of Davy Jones. The great thing about his character and how it is written is that we never know until the end what his plan really was. Based on what I saw in the first film, I do believe he had a plan to rescue Will and I don't think he sent him there to die or to serve Davy Jones. I still do not like Elizabeth because her desire to cast off the corset or journey of self reliance and discovery hurt Will. It's personal but there it is.
-
Jack is a total douche. A funny, entertaining, sympathetic douche but a douche nonetheless In two movies, he has tried to sell Will out a total of two times. Even Davey Jones asked Sparrow what the fuck was up with him sending Will to languish for all eternity in his place and if he could live with himself. And the answer was,
-
I'm going to have to come back to this. I've spent to much time here today already... But I honestly think everything that Elizabeth has done has been for the good of all involved and not just herself- granted she comes first but not at the risk of others (until she feels like she's been fully betrayed). She doesn't ask for help- she gets it at the end of a gun, the end of a marionette dress, the end of a kiss etc... because she truly believes that she's the only one who can get done what needs to be done. Beckett's not going to help her without being forced to, her father is powerless to help her and Jack will only help her if he thinks he's getting some. The things she needs help for are for the benefit of herself and everyone she cares about... This seems to be the same way that you feel about Jack.
We can disagree all day, but I honestly feel that this is to the writers' and actor's credit that they've made characters enigmatic enough and likable (and unlikable) enough to even prompt these kind of debates. -
You could have least explained why I sound like a Republican defending Bush. Did you throw that in there just to get a political shot in while you were at it? To e you sound like a Democrat willing to sell his own soul to the devil to get what he wants. You seem to just not like Jack at all, which is fine, but he did not sell Will out twice. If he was going to sell Will out why did he not rat out who Will was to Barbosa in the first movie? Why'd he try and keep that a secret. He could have just handed him over. He didn't. Why? Althought I will agree with what you said about Norrington. I'd have said screw them all too. The only one I'm behind completely is Will and if it weren't for his father, I'd root for him to just take off. I still think Jack is decent underneath his facade. He reminds me a bit of Sawyer in Lost. Selfish to a fault about the little things, but always does right when it counts.
-
dangling in the balance. Jack had NO PLAN to get Will off of DJ's ship. Jack is in many ways a coward, even. DJ is at least honest he is a scumbag, saavy? I am not rooting for Elisabeth to become a pirate. I just think it's an interesting story arc and that in the end, she will do what is right. Are you telling me you have never been tempted?
-
Believe it or not, I hope you are right about Elizabeth. I don't see it now, but I want to and I hope I will next summer.
-
Jack? I'm not sure. You know why she said "I'm not sorry" when she really was? Because she was angry at Jack for being RIGHT about her. Pirate! Yeah, I can't wait for Pt3, either. Now I want to see Pt2 again!
-
reminds me of the same thing. Won't do the right thing straight off but in a pinch, pulls through..... AND P.S. is there anybody on Earth who can tell a story better than Kevin McNally (aka Mr. Gibbs)?
-
Just because you don't know what it was doesn't mean that Jack did not have a plan. I would also say that maybe, just maybe, Jack knew Will would find his own way off. If you work well enough together sometimes you can know what a man will do before he does it. As for Elizabeth, I really hope she does choose right. I have never been tempted to do what she did. Not after being engaged anyway. Certainly not to the extent that she took it.
-
If you can't debate without hurling insults I'm not wasting my time. Who's the three year old here?
-
I didn't see anything in either movie that gives that impression, it seems like a theory that would have to be completely assumed by the viewer. What does Elizabeth do that shows that? Jack is an antihero, his moral actions don't make the audience root for him, his charisma does. I'm all for Elizabeth becoming morally ambiguous, it makes the characters and story more interesting and fits with her obsession with pirates from the very beginning. How could Jack possibly be more moral than Elizabeth? He screws people over many times, the only "bad" thing she does is sending Jack to his doom (and kissing him, which is part of the same thing). And how is she selfish? I can't think of a single act that serves only herself and nobody else, in contrast to Jack. (she only flirts with Jack to manipulate him) When Jack sacrifices the ship, it's not for a noble reason, it's because it's the only alternative to being killed by the Kraken. And it seems like Jack never had a plan that involved Will getting saved. He sends Will to his doom, does nothing to help him, and Will only gets out because he is able to save himself. Jack is surprised to see him on the beach - if he had a plan, he never set any of it into motion. I think Jack hopes Will will survive, but it's hard to see sending someone to almost certain doom instead of facing it yourself as heroic just because the guy was able to fight his way out of it. There's only so much we can take from a movie - if it shows no evidence that Jack had a plan, the logical assumption is that he had no plan. Anything beyond that is making assumptions that are completely unsupported. I also don't see how Elizabeth's action against Jack is necessarily trying to change Jack, it's possible there's more motivation than just saving lives, but the movie shows no sign of it. I'd love to see her go pirate in the third movie, but I don't see that as going to the dark side. It's not turning evil, it's throwing out the rules and authority in favor of freedom (jack's situational ethics). After all, a pirate is not a villian. As the govn'r said in the first movie, sometimes piracy is the best course of action. Honestly, it sounds like you're more anti-Elizabeth due to her liberation than anything bad she does...is it really so bad for a female to get empowered and stop being a damsel in distress?
-
is not only legit but damn cool sounding? Anyway, Elizabeth betrayed Jack because he deserved it. He lied to her about Will, put him and her in danger multiple times... Everything that happened in the 2nd film happened because of him and he was remorseless. She was angry, and did something he didn't realize she was capable of doing.
-
I assure you, the humor and darkness in Part III are equally matched. Jack and Barbossa bicker like a married couple once they meet again. Norrington redeems himself. Bootstrap falls even further into Davy Jone's grasp. Pintel and Ragetti are officially the R2 and 3PO of the trilogy. Elizabeth is a full on pirate and expect the best mexican standoff since "Reservoir Dogs" early in the film. And say via con dios to Governor Swann.
-
able to change Jack. But, it doesn't last very long, and Elisabeth is not entirely focused on Jack anyway - she's torn between him and Will (and what they represent). The moment where Jack deserts them all, though, is the nail in that coffin. She is disappointed in Jack because she wanted to believe she was able to appeal to a part of Jack, and that is when she gives in to her own piratical tendencies. :) In a way, it was a form of revenge. Likewise, Jack also toys on and off with the idea of what she challenged him with, but is too self-interested to remained focused on her. When Jack's compass doesn't work in the beginning of the film it is because of Elisabeth!
-
I wish she was in this movie, and wonder where she went off to. Hope she wasn't bones lining a cage.
-
It ain't Shakespeare, but it's a great, fun time at the movies. I can see why the kids are loving this one. Loved Davey Jones-great villain. And jeez, the Kraken, absolutely awesome.
Also, the story beats and parallels to EMPIRE STRIKES BACK are unmistakable. -
I love all this bitching and moaning about how Jack was going to do this or that. Jack did give up Will to settle his debt, even tried to bargain that his soul was worth more than 1, 4 or 3 1/2. Sure, after Davy said 99 more he asked for the boy back, but he was more than willing to trade him. That is why the writer's specifically put the line in the film about 'are you sure you can live with yourself condemning an innocent man' and Jack simply replying, 'YEP!'. To make it crystal that his intentions were to sell him out. But again, that doesn't make him a bastard, he's a pirate. He's not morally conflicted, he only gives a shit about himself and even abandoned his crew AND ship when the going got tough. Neither Will nor Jack consider the other a friend, that doesn't mean Jack doesn't like him. He helped Will in the first film out of necessity to get what he wanted. Swan believes in him, but realized what Jack refused to - that if he left with them, the Kraken would get them all. She decided what Jack couldn't, to sacrifice himself. She wasn't sorry because she knew she had to in order to save the others. A self-less act. Something, thus far, Jack has not been willing to do. Stop inventing shit that wasn't in the movie and theorizing, go with what you ACTUALLY saw or heard. I thought the film was fairly straight forward.
-
(albeit briefly) troubled by the suggestion by Lizzie that he is a good person. He is struggling with it, it's a new sensation, he doesn't really like the idea of it, because it gets in the way of everything he is. As someone else mentioned, Lizzie and Jack prove each other right in the end. She has a little pirate in her, and Jack has a good man deep down (waaaaay deep down). Jack is having a crisis of conscience in the beginning of this film (based on the events of the last) hence the whole compass-without-a-direction thing.
-
Then World's End seems to copy ROTJ with that whole *bring a prisoner to the overlord* plot and then *let's put our heroine in a compromising position with said overlord*. Except Swann is going to kick more ass than Leia, and look cooler doing it in a kimono - right? :-P
-
This was the sequel that lives up to Son of the Pink Panther.
What a load of shit this movie was, and with so much talent and great characters at the fingertips. CRAPPY. DON'T GIVE THIS MOVIE ANYMORE MONEY, and maybey they will spare us part 3. PLEASE -
I consider myself pretty level-headed about movies (I have an internship reviewing them for a website, actually), but this movie provoked a reaction out of me that's akin to a 12-year-old's: FREAKING AWESOME. I'm a huge Star Wars fan but don't even have a particular aversion to comparing it to the original trilogy (of course, maybe that's just because this just kicks way more but than any of the prequels did). And now that I've seen the movie and know firsthand how good it is, I find all the bad reviews pretty hilarious. The critical reaction was almost straight down the middle, but the bad reviews seem so blatantly out of touch. A lot of critics didn't "get" the first movie and it looks like even more don't get the second: this IS entertainment. THIS is what people want to see. And let's face it: while the moviegoing public will see bad movies, they very rarely turn them into 300 mil + hits (the exceptions being the afformentioned prequels). I really wonder what critics would say about, say, Empire Strikes Back if it came out today. I was with Pirates 2 the whole time, I loved it, and I didn't think I would like the re-emergence of Barbossa, but I loved the ending, too.
-
I wonder how many of the Pirates 2 naysayers are being negative solely because of it eclipsing their beloved Superman. To be fair, I'm only down on Superman because Singer's a traitor, but honestly, I highly doubt there'd be as many haters if Superman wasn't around. (And that goes for people not just on this board but critics, too: Lisa Schwartzbam of EW gave Superman a glowing review and then attacked Pirates 2 even harsher than the bitchslapping she gave the first one.)
-
Well, the critics hated ESB when it first came out too. There's a visciously negative Time's review somewhere from '80 that's good for laughs now that everyone acknowledges the film to be a classic.
-
Are you Savy? Then you don't like this movie. This Movie is in no way good, no mater how you look at it. A Giant Squid tearing apart a ship two times or was it three, I don't remember, how about the roll down the hill in water wheel, or was it the prison sphere at the begining. HMMM, this is all sounding to much like filler, and it feels, like we're being pandered to. We're not kids, we see the character flaws, Jack turning good, WHAT?!?! Will Turner not saying anything about that kiss. What?!?! And what the fuck is that monkey still undead, but the curse isn't on the guy with the fake eye again? It was like that in the first one when Jack took the gold piece and Barbossa was undead again. STUPID!!!!!!! I ask you to mark my words. Part 3 will not have a booming opening, because walking out of the packed theater, everyone that I could hear were pissed about how bad it was. Trust me, bad word of mouth will ravish this film like the Matrix reloaded. Remeber how that films third one did. Wait, do you remember that film? Shame on you Johnny D. for bringing Jack back for this SHIT FEST
-
I suppose everyone has different experiences, but the theater where I was at, everybody seemed to love it. It's hardly a Matrix Reloaded situation. WBLIGHTTT, the problem with your complaints is that they're all plot-detail nitpicks. Will not saying anything about the kiss? Maybe because it happened ten minutes before the end of the movie and they're obviously setting up for the third at that point! Jack turning good? He didn't, all he did was come back to help fight off the Kraken, it was Elizabeth that made him face it. And the undead monkey -- could be a continuity flaw, I don't even remember. Who cares? To answer your question, I loved it -- and I'm savy. Nailed.
-
Savvy has two v's. Figured I'd mention that before someone roasted us both.
-
Look, I'm just saying don't you think instead of putting in all this filler, they could have wrapped this thing up without dragging it out over two borring films. Cheap shot, I'm sorry. But It was just poor pacing and I felt going into so pumped because of the great first one, but this just seemed very (DISNEY!!!!!) contrived. How many rum jokes do me need, I mean we get it..They like Rum! It's not funny after the fourteenth joke. DAMN IT!
With the talent that is involved I think that if they took a little time to really find the humor, NOT RUM, and Characters, NOT Squid faced, seaweed, shark headed, starfaced eyed monster men that are just a way to conjor the realms of doing cool cgi with the crew. Please!!! And I noticed you did not comment on the Giant squid attack that happened the same way over and over and over again. Sorry, but this is to many flaws, and I can see fans of VAN HELSING and Armegadon(not spelled right most likley) looking through the dumb ass plot, But I know that one day, maybe far away, you'll see Dead mans Chest playing on the late night UPN movie and say, Wow, this is a a shit-tacular film. Sorry, this is a cancer on the first one, and the next one will most likely be the nail in the coffin.
You feel it as you read this. After I saw it the more I thought about it the worst it got. Just do yourself a favor and watch the first one then go see this one. If you still like it, Then go home after and have youself a cripple-feature with VAN HELSING. I would say the Mummy, but this is even worst then those pieces of Shit. NAILED. -
this could end up being the longest talkback ever...another record for PoTC!!!
I wish I had a funnier joke, here... -
Maybe Jack sent Will over to Davy Jones for another reason... because he knew he'd meet his Dad and that would give him even more purpose - Jack knew he would find the key and figure out some way to get off of Jones' ship. I think Jack has a lot of faith in Will, having been through what they went through together in the 1st. Will saves Jack's life a lot, and also Will did show a lot of great leadership qualities in this one. Another thing I just remembered... Jack's coming back to the ship to help defend it against the Kraken reminds me of Han Solo coming back to the Death Star battle in ANH... it's almost exactly the same. Jack and Han are very, very similar characters. Anyway, my point is, Jack is NOT just an amoral pirate... he's much much deeper than that, if you care to explore.
-
He admits he did to Lizzy when they retrieve the chest. He tries to get Norrington to kill Will instead of him. And, he wants Elisabeth for himself. Jack not only wanted Davy Jones's heart as leverage, he wanted Will out of the way. Tia Dalma alludes to this when she mocks Jack for not knowing what he wants or how to take it. Jack is considering a change of heart throughout the movie, but it only finally occurs when he comes back to the ship because of Elisabeth. And then she essentially takes this decision away from him by chaining him to the mainmast to go down with the ship. He has this ironic smile on his face when he realizes that she's turned the tables on him and that he's in love with her.
-
Anyone else find it funny that the poster who jumps on the thread near the end of its run to start slamming the movie left and right with dubious complaints (btw, the reason the monkey is still undead is explained in the post credits stinger to the first POTC movie) and spelling and grammar so poor that it seems like it must be on purpose... has 'WB' in their name? Counter promotion! Plant plant plant! Heh...
-
"And what the fuck is that monkey still undead, but the curse isn't on the guy with the fake eye again? It was like that in the first one when Jack took the gold piece and Barbossa was undead again." The Monkey grabbed a coin at the end of the last movie, after the credits. And no, that wouldn't make everyone else undead again. Jack didn't take a gold piece and turn Barbossa undead again. At the time when Jack took the piece, Barbossa and the rest of the crew was still undead because Will's blood had not been spilled yet.
-
I must call out one particular TBer:Kai_Mah'gra. You all know him he has had more wars with a laundry list of TBers and not once has diverged from trashing a given movie (the current being SR) He has been hopping from thread to thread in persute of those who liked it. I have determined he has no interest in discussing movies ie. likes and dislikes. If we all refuse to respond to him he will be forced into obscurity. Most likely he'll chang his name but atleast we can stand together against this really inane hating. A final note POTC was great. A smidgon long (which I don't normaly conplain about). peace
-
Guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Because I feel your pain with your the-more-I-thought-about-it, the-worse-it-got complaint: that's exactly how I felt which each of Lucas's prequels. With Pirates 2 I've gotta disagree with you, though. It was great! Hilarious! I know I'm gushing but I'm thankful to be. (Your specific points addressed: The supporting characters aren't supposed to be nuanced, they're supposed to mostly be comic relief -- so yes, I did laugh whenever they made a joke about the rum. And finally, the Kraken: extravagent, sure, but it followed the Rule of 3: first, it attacks the ship and we don't see it at all -- the ship is just swallowed whole. Suspense-building. Second, Will witnesses a minor attack against the ship with all those people we don't care about. We're still waiting for the big payoff. Third, finally, is the climax of the film, its prolonged attack on the Black Pearl herself. Like I said, you could make the argument that it was extravagent -- heck, I'll make the argument that it was extravagent. But it didn't feel like too much, because they structurally built up to it perfectly.)
-
Did anyone else notice or point out the resemblance of Stellan Skarsgard in his Bootstrap Bill makeup... to Sebastian Shaw's Anakin Skywalker makeup at the end of ROTJ?
The blue-ish tint... the sagging bloodshot watery eyes... Even Bootstrap's starfish mutation looks kind of like some of Anakin's scarring.
Another in a long line of possible OT homages in these movies. -
And just 3 million off the 5 day record, looks like it has a shot at the 6 day and 1 week records. Every day that goes by, this looks like it has more potential. 350M? 400M? Can't wait to see how the second weekend hold will be, with weekdays this huge it seems like word of mouth and repeat viewings are very good. With unbelivably weak competition for weeks and weeks, this could be the biggest thing since Shrek 2.
-
please.
-
http://www.eonline.com/News/Items/0,1,19475,00.html?fdnews
I'm no troll. I'm a fan of POTC saga. And my apologies if it's already been posted above (have't read through whole thread). Just thought AICN TBers would want to know. -
Chester J. Lampwick. Better get Bart and Lisa on the case.
-
It will have a 64 to 69 percent drop this weekend. Watch and see.
I'm not being mean, this movie has horrible word of mouth, by weeks end you'll see the effects -
East India Trading Company=Quentessons. The Kraken=Unicron. Barbossa=Megatron/Galvatron. Davy Jones' heart=The Matrix of Leadership. Will=Hot Rod. Elizabeth=Arcee. Norrington=Starscream. The Black Pearl=The Ark. Tortuga=Cybertron That is all.
-
Second weekend hold won't be as good as the first, but it probably will be far better than most movies this big. 60% is ridiculous, it will be low to mid 50's and even has a long shot at dropping less than 50. If WOM was bad, we wouldn't see such strong holds on sunday, or such HUGE weekdays. You don't set the tuesday record with bad word of mouth. Sorry you didn't like it, but I don't think your campaign to bash the movie is going to hurt it any. So this article is off the front page...will we get a Pirates 2nd weekend talkback?
-
"...Sums?" and "an undead monkey" were among my favorite lines, in a movie filled with great ones. Davy Jones was spectacularly done, Depp was spot-on perfect, Keira was fun, spunky, and desirable (not one of the whiny punks on this talkback complaining about her looks would turn away from her in real life). Fun from start to finish.
-
Hate to burst your bubble, but according to B.O. Report POTC is on track to make $60 million over the weekend, whhic will bring it two week total to $256 million while SR fell to 4th with a project take of $11 million for the weekend, which will bring its total to 161 million. The analyst have already conceded that SR is unlikely to reach $200 million domestically.
-
Dead Man's Chest looks to drop only about 54% from last weekend. That's pretty damn sturdy for a film that had the biggest opening of all time.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 273 total posts 271 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 92 total posts 92 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 160 total posts 69 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 151 total posts 63 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 67 total posts 59 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 60 total posts 57 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 484 total posts 49 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 69 total posts 42 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 120 total posts 32 posts
- SPACE 2099!! -- 183 total posts 24 posts