Any others dissapoointed with POTC 2?

[Caraccioli]

Yes, I've heard that, but it doesn't make sense.  Barbossa and his whole crew would have been freed from the curse a long time ago if it worked that way.  They each put back the coin they pulled out and placed their blood on it.  But it doesn't work that way in the movie.  Not all the coins were put back, Wil Turner's was still out so all were still cursed.  And then Jack pulls one out too.  If Wil's was put back in, but Jack's stayed out they'd all still be cursed.  All the coins must be returned if pulled out.  What the writers say doesn't go with that whole story behind the chest that Barbossa tells.  It's simple, you pull out a coin, you're cursed and must spill some blood on the coin and return it.  If someone else also pulls out a coin before you return your piece, you're screwed until they do the same.  The chest has 882 pieces, it must always have that amount.  How amusing, they have the curse go one way, with the story they have Barbossa tell.  And then afterwards say something different.  I don't think they really know how they want the curse to go. 

Well, anyway, the curse thing has always been my beef.  I watched the 1st movie a lot and really paid attention to that stuff.  What the writers say contradicts what they actually did in the movie.  I'm going by what actually happened in the movie, not what they said after.

Christine has a point. I believe it really comes down to what the writers said in their VO: it was too confusing having multiple curses, so they simplified the whole thing to avoid losing the audience. Lose the audience in a film like this one and you're screwed.

However, I can explain it from my perspective.

Barbossa said, "Buried on an island that cannot be found except for those who know where it is. Find it, we did. There be the chest, inside be the gold, we took them all."

Note here that the crew each took some of the gold at the same time. If you want to get really technical, you could argue that each crew member should have to return the pieces they took with their blood on them. (Talk about over-analyzing...). For the sake of simplicity, let's throw that aside and take the writers (who are also the creators of the story) at their word. Continuing...

"Spent them and traded them. We frittered them away on drink and food and pleasurable company. The more we gave them away, the more we came to realize... the drink would not satisfy, food turned to ash in our mouths, and all the pleasurable company in the world could not slake our lust. We are cursed men, Miss Turner. Compelled by greed we were, and now we are consumed by it. There is one way we can end our curse. All the scattered pieces of the Aztec gold must be restored and the blood repaid. Thanks to ye we have the final piece."

Now that's sort of vague IMO. It sounds exactly like what Christine said: all the pieces have to be in the chest to lift the curse. However (and I admit I am anally analyzing here):

1. Considering it from the undead pirate's perspective, they only understand the curse as it relates to them. They know that they are cursed and have to get the gold back to the chest with the blood repaid. (How did they figure this out? The instruction manual. Ok, that's really anal...)

2. Even so, they don't know what happens if someone else takes a piece from the chest.

3. I think the part where he says "All the scattered pieces of the Aztec gold must be restored..." is what is confusing when compared to what the writers said. However, you can take that as "we need all 882 pieces in there" or "all the pieces we scattered around need to be returned." The piece Jack stole was already returned by the pirates with blood repaid apparently, which (to me) means it's been accounted for in their curse. Now Jack enters a new contract by stealing it again.

Are there scenes in the deleted material where Jack puts only his piece back in to remove his curse? I don't remember... (Ah, well. It is only a movie.)

[Caraccioli]

Would you forgive me if I said I had my head down the toilet for a bit, before collapsing into bed unconcious?

I didn't know you needed me. I'm flattered.

Only to keep coming up with increasingly absurd reasons that Barbossa would come back from the dead. Have we touched on all the major movie cliches yet?

What about this: Barbossa was in love before he became undead and he was only nearly dead when Jack shot him?

[Cire]

Well, you've just cleared up for me my own line of thinking right there. The gold had already been returned and entered into a new contract.

If one wants to get truly pathetic, Jack took out a number of them (was it three?) put all but one back, and then only repaid the one. It could be argued that he ought to have had to pay back each piece, but that would just start getting ridiculous...

[Cire]

Would you forgive me if I said I had my head down the toilet for a bit, before collapsing into bed unconcious?

I didn't know you needed me. I'm flattered.

Only to keep coming up with increasingly absurd reasons that Barbossa would come back from the dead. Have we touched on all the major movie cliches yet?

What about this: Barbossa was in love before he became undead and he was only nearly dead when Jack shot him?

I knew there had to be a catch. Darn.

hmm... transferred his conciousness into Jack the monkey before he died and went through a ritual steeped in pirate mysticism to have it returned to his body?

[Lady Seahawke]

Like I said, story continuity is lacking...first one was minor but could be overlooked...the second has MAJOR holes in it. The sword fight and island chase should have been cut down and more actual story added.

Also, Jack according to the movie is not a very good pirate.

In the first he was mutinied and was trying to get his ship back...took 10 years for him to do it and only with Will and Elizabeth's help. Why did it take 10 years for him to commandeer a ship to go after the Pearl?

In the second, we see him escape from a hell-hole of a prison only to be faced by his crew complaining that they hadn't had any "shiny stuff" in a VERY long time. Crew on the verge of a mutiny here? I was expecting it when I heard that, but then it was negated with him looking for Davey's locker.

When Will goes to look for him, most often the people tell him to look for him in Singapore...not the Caribbean.

Then he meets up with Davey and Davey himself pronounces Jack as a poor pirate....ie. the conversation...

"you were captain for 13 years as agreed upon."

"Well, actually, only 2 there was that thing of mutiny"

"That isn't my fault you weren't a good captain...you strutted about introducing yourself as ...CAPTAIN..."

Now he loses the pearl to Davey's locker, after only months of regaining it.

So, is Jack just a pirate wannabe ...He has never, shown us anything except he is an escape artist and even in that he most often needs to be rescued.

The only actual pirating we have seen is Barbossa's crew...they were the ones that had taken the ship when Elizabeth was young and they were the ones doing the raiding to get the coin back.

And yes, I know I have seen the outtakes on the DVD...but we are looking at the movie's finished product and not what the writer's seen fit to remove. If it hit the cutting room floor, then it isn't part of the movie.

[Cire]

I myself feel differently. Unless it is an alternate scenario, I often believe the outtakes to be part of a movie. I amlost view the "finished product" as more of an abridged version, and the outtakes complete it, but that is just me.

[Caraccioli]

"Jack is not a very good pirate."

Hmm. Ok, you may be right. So? Jack is a goofy Bugs Bunny character pulling bombs out of his inside jacket pocket. Even Depp admits that.

He did take the big ship from Port Royal with Will's help. And it seems to me there was something implied about him stealing the little, sinking ship seen in the beginning of the first movie. (Some pirates from that era actually started out by stealing canoes.)

"There's not a lot of pyracy in these movies."

I agree with that, particularly in the second one. Again I wonder...so? I think Mad Jack hit the nail on the head. These are escapist monster movies with caribbean pirates as the vehicle. I remember reading a review that said if Disney had made POTC:COTBP as a standard pirate movie it probably would have gone the way of Cutthroat Island. Then there wouldn't be a sequel at all.

As for your math, I don't have an answer, but since we're all analyzing...

13 Years since the Pearl sunk the first time (If I understand and remember the 2nd movie correctly, the Pearl was sunk and Jack somehow conned Davy Jones into raising it in exchange for Jack's eventual service.)

10 Years Jack spent looking for it after the mutiny

2 Years he was captain - was this before or after the mutiny? We don't really know. Could the crew be complaining about 2 years of fruitless pirating and trying to find the sunken island?

Say, where's the missing year? There's another plot hole for you. Perhaps you should be upset about that too.

As for what's canon and what's not...that's usually an ugly discussion. I remember watching battle royales at TheForce.net over such things. What does it matter? I was just pointing out how I understood the curse. You may understand it differently. Works for me. (How did we get so deeply into this topic? It's probably my fault.)

[Lady Seahawke]

Actually we do know the timing sequence on this on. As stated in the conversation....

2 years when he was captain of the Pearl THEN (as stated in the conversation with between Davey and Jack) the mutiny. 10 years to find it...and almost a year of him having it back...i.e..ending the 13th year and time to pay Davey.

That one adds up...

Hey, I already said I am one that is a stickler about story continuity.

[Caraccioli]

Actually we do know the timing sequence on this on. As stated in the conversation....

2 years when he was captain of the Pearl THEN (as stated in the conversation with between Davey and Jack) the mutiny. 10 years to find it...and almost a year of him having it back...i.e..ending the 13th year and time to pay Davey.

Oh, ok.

One year seems to me to be a pretty long time to spend on a ship with no plunder if your goal is plunder.

[Caraccioli]

hmm... transferred his conciousness into Jack the monkey before he died and went through a ritual steeped in pirate mysticism to have it returned to his body?

That's a good one!

How about: Before he died he was bitten by a zombie and is now actually a zombie undead rather than just plain vanilla undead?

[Lady Seahawke]

One year seems to me to be a pretty long time to spend on a ship with no plunder if your goal is plunder.

Well, the conversation between Jack and Gibbs (as stated previously) the crew was upset about the lack of, Gibbs..."...Shiny things, its been a long time. A Very long time since we seen it. ...Island sinking and all" the rest of the crew grumbles nearby.

So, after Jack got the ship back, he may have gotten a prize or two...or since he was able to take them to the island. The crew (some of which looked new) looked ragged and very hungry.

And remember Will and Elizabeth were to married that day...weddings, epecially back then to the Governor's daughter didn't happen in short time. So, Jack must have kept the Pearl for at least ...near close to a year.

My question is if he is just a bad pirate, he had tricked Will in nearly spending eternity on Davey's ship...thinking that Elizabeth had the hots for him....Jack had NO redeeming values to him in this one...SO,

why would anyone care to risk their lives for Jack?

As far as Barbossa goes...I hope it isn't him returned...I hope it comes out to be his brother...

[Caraccioli]

As far as Barbossa goes...I hope it isn't him returned...I hope it comes out to be his brother...

Perhaps the first movie was all a dream or something that happened in the imagination of a child in a sanitarium?

[Cap'n Pete Straw]

I only read the first three posts in this thread, and then decided to jump in with my own response to the original topic question... Having not read the entire thread, please excuse me if I ignore or reiterate things previously stated.

Disappointed? No, not really. The movie was overly long, but I feel I got my money's worth. MORE than my money's worth, and that does NOT leave me with a feeling of "disappointment." The most important factor was that I was thoroughly entertained for the 4 or 5 hours I was in the theater (how the hell long was it?).

I did not see PotCII opening night -- I waited several days and then saw it with two of my kids (and at a matinee show, saving a few bucks, with almost no one else in the theater -- this is how I prefer to see movies). Thus I had heard most of the critical reviews before seeing the film, and I felt it lived up to a level above the criticism.

The costuming was beyond fantastic (ten minutes into the movie, I already felt that it was money well spent), the sets and special effects were excellent (Davy Jones was mesmerizing), the action was fast-paced and invigorating.... What else was there?

Oh, the storyline. I really have no complaints. Like "Empire Strikes Back" and "Back to the Future 2", this is a transition movie from #1 to #3. I hear some of you (and others) implying the movie sucked along the lines of "Back to the Future 2". I, however, found the movie as enjoyable and watchable as "Empire Strikes Back." And as time has passed, "Empire" turned out to be the most watchable of the original trilogy (don't argue with me on this -- you will not win the argument).

Having said this, I have cautioned people who have yet to see the movie (as the local resident pirate, everyone seems to want my input) to expect a transistion movie only preparing them for the third in the series, but which is still full of action and fun.

And Action and Fun are what the movie is full of.

Again: I really have no complaints. My opinion will be tempered next year by how Dinsney plans to tie up all the loose plotlines... If they drop the ball, then this movie will prove to have been a waste of time. If, however, they effectively use this springboard to make a remarkable two-part (#2+3) saga along the lines of... er... "Kill Bill 1+2" (the only example that comes to mind), then this might prove to be a far better (half-)film than I have already given it credit for.

Possibly the best thing about this movie is that there is a sudden outpouring of pirate stuff into the mainstream pop culture. The second movie has only fed into the pirate interest remaining from the first one, and fanned the flames of Pirate Passion. Books, obscure movie titles, toys... and I cannot wait for this year's Halloween.

Anyway, that is my two doubloons worth. It is apparent that some -- or many -- of you disagree. And I am sorry you were expecting more, only to have been disappointed... perhaps another movie (other than PotCIII) will be made in the near future that will dwarf Disney's work. Here's hoping...

[Christine]

I only read the first three posts in this thread, and then decided to jump in with my own response to the original topic question... Having not read the entire thread, please excuse me if I ignore or reiterate things previously stated.

Disappointed? No, not really. The movie was overly long, but I feel I got my money's worth. MORE than my money's worth, and that does NOT leave me with a feeling of "disappointment." The most important factor was that I was thoroughly entertained for the 4 or 5 hours I was in the theater (how the hell long was it?).

I did not see PotCII opening night -- I waited several days and then saw it with two of my kids (and at a matinee show, saving a few bucks, with almost no one else in the theater -- this is how I prefer to see movies). Thus I had heard most of the critical reviews before seeing the film, and I felt it lived up to a level above the criticism.

The costuming was beyond fantastic (ten minutes into the movie, I already felt that it was money well spent), the sets and special effects were excellent (Davy Jones was mesmerizing), the action was fast-paced and invigorating.... What else was there?

Oh, the storyline. I really have no complaints. Like "Empire Strikes Back" and "Back to the Future 2", this is a transition movie from #1 to #3. I hear some of you (and others) implying the movie sucked along the lines of "Back to the Future 2". I, however, found the movie as enjoyable and watchable as "Empire Strikes Back." And as time has passed, "Empire" turned out to be the most watchable of the original trilogy (don't argue with me on this -- you will not win the argument).

Having said this, I have cautioned people who have yet to see the movie (as the local resident pirate, everyone seems to want my input) to expect a transistion movie only preparing them for the third in the series, but which is still full of action and fun.

And Action and Fun are what the movie is full of.

Again: I really have no complaints. My opinion will be tempered next year by how Dinsney plans to tie up all the loose plotlines... If they drop the ball, then this movie will prove to have been a waste of time. If, however, they effectively use this springboard to make a remarkable two-part (#2+3) saga along the lines of... er... "Kill Bill 1+2" (the only example that comes to mind), then this might prove to be a far better (half-)film than I have already given it credit for.

Possibly the best thing about this movie is that there is a sudden outpouring of pirate stuff into the mainstream pop culture. The second movie has only fed into the pirate interest remaining from the first one, and fanned the flames of Pirate Passion. Books, obscure movie titles, toys... and I cannot wait for this year's Halloween.

Anyway, that is my two doubloons worth. It is apparent that some -- or many -- of you disagree. And I am sorry you were expecting more, only to have been disappointed... perhaps another movie (other than PotCIII) will be made in the near future that will dwarf Disney's work. Here's hoping...

I agree, I had a lot of fun with this movie! Yeah, it was a long movie, but it still had a lot of fun stuff in it to keep me entertained. It also was great to see it in a very cool theater owned by Disney, the El Capitan. Everything about seeing a Disney movie in that theater is awesome, the whole atmosphere, it's different than regular theater-going. I want to see Pirates 2 again, but going to regular theater just wouldn't be the same.

And btw, Lady Seahawke and Caraccioli, Barbossa is really back. It's not his brother, dopplerganger or whatever else, he's the real deal. Even Bess had mentioned that some time ago. He's back and I'm so happy he is! :)

[Cire]

Ancient alien technology healed his wound and brought him back to life.

[Cap'n Pete Straw]

'Twas only a flesh wound, and he was faking it the whole time...

[Lady Seahawke]

Barbossa is really back. It's not his brother, dopplerganger or whatever else, he's the real deal.

Yeah, that is what I thought...but, too many "miracles" in a movie even such as this kindda ruins things.

Well, IMHO, as long as the movie was there were just too many dang holes in the plot. , just left the movie with a "What the?" feeling about it.

But on the other hand with Barbossa back, at least we may get to see some good ship chase and battles. Hope Norrington comes back and does battle with him at least.

[Caraccioli]

'Twas only a flesh wound, and he was faking it the whole time...

But your arm's off!

What if Jack was using blanks and Barbossa had blood packs that were activated by squibs when Jack shot him? Then he pretended to be dead...nah, that's far too ridiculous!

[Caraccioli]

But on the other hand with Barbossa back, at least we may get to see some good ship chase and battles. Hope Norrington comes back and does battle with him at least.

I predict that the actions of Norrington and Barbossa will be the most intellectually interesting things going on in the next film. Here's hoping...

[Rumba Rue]

I felt that some of the scenes were ridiculous, like the fighting on the waterwheel.

I too would have liked to have seen how in the beginning Jack was in a coffin.

The scene with Davey Jones playing the organ was right out of Disney's 20 Thousand Leagues Under the Sea, i.e. Captian Nemo.

I think the dog bit was overused.

I didn't feel it was as funny as the first, and was far more intense.

Honestly I didn't notice the time going by, as I was captivated by it all.

The thing I hated the most- the TV ads showing too many scenes to garner an audience- really ruined a lot of it for me.

But all in all, I've seen worse films, so I think this one is pretty much middle of the road kind of thing. I do think the third one will be better as there are far too many loose ends that need to be tied up for a final major battle (which I understand from 'those in the know') is going to be fantastic.

[Lady Seahawke]

Personally, in the next one....I would like to see...

...with Norrington shanghiing the East Indian Trading Company...

Barbossa sailing off with the Pearl...with Norrington hot after him

Turners...father and son, commandeering their own vessel....privateering, and going after Barbossa. (There is that thing of being tied to a cannon ya know and am sure Turner senior will be wanting a bit repaid for that one too)

Jack and Elizabeth getting married after Jack becomes Governor. (Hey, as smooth talking Jack is, he make a great politican.)

[Black Bess]

Personally, in the next one....I would like to see...

...with Norrington shanghiing the East Indian Trading Company...

Barbossa sailing off with the Pearl...with Norrington hot after him

Turners...father and son, commandeering their own vessel....privateering, and going after Barbossa.  (There is that thing of being tied to a cannon ya know and am sure Turner senior will be wanting a bit repaid for that one too)

Jack and Elizabeth getting married after Jack becomes Governor. (Hey, as smooth talking Jack is, he make a great politican.)

   

That there would be a nice ending, minus Elizabeth. Methinks Jack's too good fer her.

No, really.

[flying-dutch-man]

i enjoyed it..........luved the comedy,luved keira knightley,luved the adventure,luved keiras knightley!!!!! she was hot in this movie!!!!

but it could have been a little better.

~F-D-M

[Christine]

Well, I went to see it again today and it was even better the 2nd time. To those who say you were disappointed with it, perhaps watch it again. Seeing it again was great, little details I missed the first time I noticed this time. Laughed again, they may have made Jack more of a goofball, but oh, well, it was damn funny! He was funny when needed and serious when needed, it just works. And of course just loving Barbossa's entrance more and more. It just keeps getting better when I see it. Cheered again at his entrance! lol!

[Mad Matt]

Am I the only one who loved seeing a Caribbean-tanned Elizabeth?

::drool::