I Did Not Like the "Pirates of the Caribbean" Trilogy
I wonder if I was the only person who didn't like it. It seems like all my friends loved it and most anyone I come across. I didn't like it at all. I can see why the masses like it but I found it lacking substance. I suppose I just didn't like how the movie was shot. I probably just have a beef with the editor. Because the performances of the cast were decent but I felt smothered by the editing. The shots were way to short and tight. It'd probably have been better shot in anamorphic. I felt smothered by the tight editing of the battle sequences. I sat waiting for a wide shot and none came. I was inundated by close ups and fast cuts. I felt smothered. I felt like I was being bombarded by computer generated effects. Effects that overshadowed good performances and a decent plot.
I'm beginning to believe movies are only made today for kids and the MTV generation. Sure I'm only twenty eight but I didn't watch TV growing up. I probably am old fashion. I just like a slow paced film, with a decent plot, adequate character development, beautiful cinematography, limited computer generated effects, and few cuts. I like to see the actors and the characters they portray unfold the story for me. I'm probably asking way to much. Heck this is 2008, we're long past making movies with meaning and a moral message to be gleaned. I probably watched way to many Tennessee Williams film adaptations. I probably goto the community theatre to often. I just might be way behind on the times. But let me tell you, I know what inspires me. It's certainly not computer generated effects but it's performances.
I want to see more old school movies. Some of you might remember the movies I'm talking about. Those movies that dug deep into the personal lives of the characters portrayed in them. By the end of the movie you felt you knew them personally. Even action movies were paced slower. Take for instance one of my favorite movies, "Die Hard" it was very slow paced. There was action packed scenes but the there was pauses to give the audience breathing room. It just seems action movies today try to squeeze as many computer generated effects into one scene as possible.
I hope one day some new directors will bring back old styles. I wonder if it's possible to teach a new dog old tricks?
I'm beginning to believe movies are only made today for kids and the MTV generation. Sure I'm only twenty eight but I didn't watch TV growing up. I probably am old fashion. I just like a slow paced film, with a decent plot, adequate character development, beautiful cinematography, limited computer generated effects, and few cuts. I like to see the actors and the characters they portray unfold the story for me. I'm probably asking way to much. Heck this is 2008, we're long past making movies with meaning and a moral message to be gleaned. I probably watched way to many Tennessee Williams film adaptations. I probably goto the community theatre to often. I just might be way behind on the times. But let me tell you, I know what inspires me. It's certainly not computer generated effects but it's performances.
I want to see more old school movies. Some of you might remember the movies I'm talking about. Those movies that dug deep into the personal lives of the characters portrayed in them. By the end of the movie you felt you knew them personally. Even action movies were paced slower. Take for instance one of my favorite movies, "Die Hard" it was very slow paced. There was action packed scenes but the there was pauses to give the audience breathing room. It just seems action movies today try to squeeze as many computer generated effects into one scene as possible.
I hope one day some new directors will bring back old styles. I wonder if it's possible to teach a new dog old tricks?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Spartacus on -
I personally liked the first film, but the second and the third were almost painful to watch. I agree about the editing. While I don't even mind fast paced editing, the second film felt face paced, yet didn't really seem to ever go anywhere.
-
Permalink Reply by DLM on -
I loved the first, hated the second, felt to lost in the third to know. The first movie was so good, the rest of the trilogy suffered trying to measure up. I loved many of the actors, including Johny Depp as Captain Jack who I thought was great.
-
Permalink Reply by NetflixJunkie on -
It's really all about box office.
Create a movie that seems a little bit adult to the kids, throw a PG-13 rating on it, and watch the ticket sales zoom. I actually did enjoy the first two films much more than the last. To me the actors seemed as disinterested as I did.Maybe because the script was way too long and difficult to follow.
-
Permalink Reply by Movie Man Andrew on -
The actors loved the characters and the script, and pretty much the whole filmmaking experience otherwise they would quit.
-
Permalink Reply by Deus Ex Machina on -
Like everyone else so far I liked the first. The second was disappointing, and i was actually checking my watch during the third, wondering when it would end. Does it count that i went to the theater to see it anyway? Probably. I've already paid for the ticket and I can't get that money or time back. However I'll be more wary next time Disney comes out with a film based on a ride. I'm going to be reading the reviews of "It's a Small World" very closely before I see it.
-
Permalink Reply by Movie Man Andrew on
-
Sequels are always disappointing. That's why I don't hype up too much about movies: For fear of getting disappointed. It's all too predictable. The non-hype tactic works for me still, as when I go to see a movie without expectations that are too high, I find myself actually enjoying the movie.
-
Permalink Reply by Microwaved on -
#1 good.
#2 not so good.
#3 not so good either.
-
Permalink Reply by pterosaur on -
I've only seen the first one. I've never bothered with the other two. If it weren't for the fact that Johnny Depp is so damn hot, I might not have even liked the first one.
-
Permalink Reply by Microwaved on
-
#2 & #3 were just pure masturbation on the part of the studios and director. No story, terrible pacing, editing and directing and mixed up convuluted plots.
Everybody constantly backstabbing everyone else. Really there was no protagonist to root for in the last two. At least in the first one you liked Will and what's her face. The second two, not so much.
-
Permalink Reply by Deus Ex Machina on
-
Most annoying character from #2 and #3? I'd have to vote for Tia Dalma.
-
Permalink Reply by Snorii on -
I'm one of the crazy people that enjoyed the second one more than the first. For whatever reason, the pacing felt slow on the first one and I was somewhat bored. The last one was ok, but not as good as number two.
Overall, I enjoyed the Captain Sparrow character, Davy Jones & Crew, Captain Barbossa, and more colorful characters in the trilogy. I thought Swann was an ok character, but anytime they showed any focus on the romance with Will Turner Jr., I felt like fast forwarding. I also didn't like "normal" bad guys like the East India Trade people, they just didn't seem to have much personality.
-
Permalink Reply by Movie Man Andrew on
-
They're not really supposed to have much personality. They're working under a power-hungry tyrant.
© 2008 Created by droidmaker on Ning. Create your own social network
