Escape to the Movies: Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
Get him to the Greek was really funny. Ive heard this, while lacking a good plot, is really fun too...
Honestly Bobs getting to be too much of a movie snob. (Ho ho!) To me it feels like he dislikes a movie based on what it is itself and he goes in hating somthing, just to come out with everything in it slightly twisted to fit his hate.
Honestly Bobs getting to be too much of a movie snob. (Ho ho!) To me it feels like he dislikes a movie based on what it is itself and he goes in hating somthing, just to come out with everything in it slightly twisted to fit his hate.
I totally agree with this review.
Why Hollywood spoils everything good it has nowadays? The first film was grate, the second and third were good enough (yet I feel like they shouldn't be two of them), and then the fourth came to realise my worst fears. Not to mention the 3D part...
They had art (mostly) and now all they have left is the business end. Such a shame!
The only good part of this film is the soundtrack!!!
Why Hollywood spoils everything good it has nowadays? The first film was grate, the second and third were good enough (yet I feel like they shouldn't be two of them), and then the fourth came to realise my worst fears. Not to mention the 3D part...
They had art (mostly) and now all they have left is the business end. Such a shame!
The only good part of this film is the soundtrack!!!
I watched it yesterday, unfortunatly in 3D (it was on the right time that me and my friends were there) it was alright, a stupid movie to watch and not really have to think all that much about considering we had all just got out of an exam. Chuckled a few bits, but other than that thought it was very meh. fight scenes in 3D were rubbish though i found it so hard to concentrate on what was happening. It really annoys me that so many big movies feel the need to make it in 3D even if it doesn't add anything to the movie or in the case of this one makes it worse.
Never saw the movie, never had an interest in it, but now that you've said that, it actually makes me want to see it!GiantRaven said:
I don't really base my watches on either strictly going to see it because Bob says so, or going to see it because he says not to. He's a big boy and knows what he likes, and so am I. What I appreciate is that he has a good idea of the reasons he likes or dislikes a film, and seems pretty educated on aspects of filmmaking that contribute to quality, as opposed to the layman perspective of something "looking cool" or "I liked that guy" without understanding the mechanisms used to make things appealing. In particular, I love the way directors like Martin Campbell and Christopher Nolan use the camera as active storytelling devices, and I keyed in early to his appreciation for their work.
On the flip side of that, I liked the Transformers movies (although I do not object to ANY of the complaints about the second one), and I loved the new Star Trek. I loved the characters, I loved the visual design, and though a lot of the science and time compression was utterly ludicrous, I am mindful that this is coming from a series in which previous baddies have involved pipe-cleaner marionettes, giant energy hands in space literally gripping the front of the ship, and a little more recently, satellites turned into giant clouds that eat Klingon ships. And the Kelvin scene where they cut the sound way down and swell up the Giacchino soundtrack is to me just a couple notches behind the opening scene of Up (same technique and same composer, by the way).
That said, I agreed with his philosophy enough to take him at his word that, while Thor was a fun ride with a nice visual design, this is just a tired re-hashing of a supporting character's mischievous charm expanded into a main role. It smacks to me of Nicolas Cage's movie career: memorable in supporting roles like Kick-Ass, as long as he's not being asked to carry the whole movie like Con Air or City of Angels. On top of which, I don't have enough love for Jack that I can forgive the popcorn film excuse like I do with Star Trek. So this is probably a pass for me, especially when there are like seven other movies that I DO want to see this summer.
The Muppets are a long-anticipated return but not really a surprising one. Jim Henson saw the popularity of the characters wax and wane in long cycles, seven or eight years at a time, which is why he did those movies in the late 70s, early 80s, and then gave them a break for a while. It wasn't until his son Brian picked it back up in 94 that the studio saw a window to re-enter the market. And after a few movies, they took another break. The last year or two they've been gauging interest in their Youtube channel and now they feel the time is right to get back in. And it's more or less right on schedule.
Ok, let's examine your list here
just plain wut?
let's just look at some of the things to come out of star trek after star trek 3
Star Trek IV the Voyage home
star trek VI The undiscovered country
Star Trek: The Next Generation
Star Trek: Deep Space 9
Star Trek: First Contact
star Trek (2011)
So ALL of those sucked?? Really???
On Her Majesty's Secret Service, The Spy Who Loved Me, and Casino Royale and Thunderball all came out after Goldfinger and they're considered just as good as the first 3
Episodes 1and 3 were a hell of a lot of fun. Episode 2 isn't as bad as people saysergnb said:
wut?
just plain wut?
let's just look at some of the things to come out of star trek after star trek 3
Star Trek IV the Voyage home
star trek VI The undiscovered country
Star Trek: The Next Generation
Star Trek: Deep Space 9
Star Trek: First Contact
star Trek (2011)
So ALL of those sucked?? Really???
Was was never good
again WUT???
On Her Majesty's Secret Service, The Spy Who Loved Me, and Casino Royale and Thunderball all came out after Goldfinger and they're considered just as good as the first 3
4 is not nearly as bad as a certain hatedom tries to portray it as being (with the exception of the monkeys)
Deathly hallows part1 is the best film so far
no argument here
never seen
Watched it today. Not at all a good movie, but made me chuckle here and there. however, nicepeters Epic rap battles of history on youtube makes me laugh my brains out, and thats Free! its just about watching jack being awesome, nothing more to it.
For too long I've been parched of thirst and unable to quench it.
Too long I've been starving to death, and haven't died.
I feel nothing.
Not the wind on my face, nor the spray of the sea.
Nor the warmth of a woman's flesh.
You best start believing in ghost stories, Miss Turner. You're in one.
Too long I've been starving to death, and haven't died.
I feel nothing.
Not the wind on my face, nor the spray of the sea.
Nor the warmth of a woman's flesh.
You best start believing in ghost stories, Miss Turner. You're in one.
One of the most memorable scenes I've seen in any movie, and though The Black Pearl was the best of the trilogy, I really liked Dead Man's Chest and At World's End. I'll find out later today if On Stranger Tides is going to let me down, but for some reason I doubt it will.
I saw it because I enjoyed the previous three (though after rewatching them: the Third one was kind of a mess and the second is pretty good). However I was still skeptical coming in, after all do we need a new Pirates movie, especially one that looks like it's only going to focus on Jack? Having seen the movie, I will happily say that the movie is a lot of fun, and easily of the sequels. Does it have some flaws, yes, but it easily captures what made the first one great.
I'd give it an 8/10.
PS. I find it peculiar that you bash this as a money grabbing film, yet praised Sucker Punch despite being a money grabbing film made only to fit the masturbatory fantasies of 13-year old boys.
I'd give it an 8/10.
PS. I find it peculiar that you bash this as a money grabbing film, yet praised Sucker Punch despite being a money grabbing film made only to fit the masturbatory fantasies of 13-year old boys.
idk, i was kinda expecting this, and i probably will wait for redbox or something now, but i'll probably still watch it.
i don't agree with alice in wonderland being bad just because they added a plot that includes some good vs evil fighting (actually had to go back and watch that review). i thought it worked fairly well, and there was a lot of that movie i liked. besides, isn't there a game out (i think there's a sequel that's been floating around) that took a similar, if an even darker plot? just because its been done before is no reason to dismiss it.
on an off note, wow, it just occurred to me how much i missed when i had limited internet for a year ...
i don't agree with alice in wonderland being bad just because they added a plot that includes some good vs evil fighting (actually had to go back and watch that review). i thought it worked fairly well, and there was a lot of that movie i liked. besides, isn't there a game out (i think there's a sequel that's been floating around) that took a similar, if an even darker plot? just because its been done before is no reason to dismiss it.
on an off note, wow, it just occurred to me how much i missed when i had limited internet for a year
...
I'm pretty sure I can guess how moviebob is going to review movies now.; this latest review cemented it.
He's fallen into the 'seen too many movies' issue, where things that are done to death for him might not be the same for someone (ie younger) that hasn't seen the list of movies he has. If something new isn't brought to the table, he will be disappoint, since he obviously doesn't seem to like the idea of a 'popcorn on the couch' style movie. (Although he did have a raging hard-on for sucker punch...)
As for the movie itself, it's an average adventure flick that while not doing anything extravagant, it doesn't fail at anything either. Personally I prefer 'jack sparrow the movie' because I was getting real sick of Legolas and his daddy issues. By movie 3, it was done to death.
He's fallen into the 'seen too many movies' issue, where things that are done to death for him might not be the same for someone (ie younger) that hasn't seen the list of movies he has. If something new isn't brought to the table, he will be disappoint, since he obviously doesn't seem to like the idea of a 'popcorn on the couch' style movie. (Although he did have a raging hard-on for sucker punch...)
As for the movie itself, it's an average adventure flick that while not doing anything extravagant, it doesn't fail at anything either. Personally I prefer 'jack sparrow the movie' because I was getting real sick of Legolas and his daddy issues. By movie 3, it was done to death.
Saw it today. No surprise, it was awesome. But then again, I am alone in thinking that the second is (by a hair's breadth) the best of the trilogy.
At least this is a actual PIRATE movie instead of something of a crappy love story with Pirates just thrown in like the first three were.
It's like those reviewers who say "If it Isn't Citizen Kane quality then the movie automatically fails."samus17 said:
What happenend to u Bob? U used to be so cool. I used to watch yo show but u become so elitist. U let personal taste cloud yo judgement - U MAD? Movies don't have 2 be like serious and all, u know. Some times I just wanna watch some action and teh funny jokes. I just want to laugh - not think and stuff. U just angry because Scott Pilgrim didn't do well. I will NEVAH watch yo show again!
A few friends invited me along for 'On Stranger Tides' and I kinda regret that I agreed to go. The film really did feel like it was supposed to appeal to the lowest common denominator. Sure, there certainly was a couple of amusing, hillarious scenes,and Johnny Depp's performance definitely steals the spotlight - but a few giggles and wacky acting scattered across two hours seems like a waste of screen time...
A few friends invited me along for 'On Stranger Tides' and I kinda regret that I agreed to go. The film really did feel like it was supposed to appeal to the lowest common denominator. Sure, there certainly was a couple of amusing, hillarious scenes,and Johnny Depp's performance definitely steals the spotlight - but a few giggles and wacky acting scattered across two hours seems like a waste of screen time...
Eh, it was okay. Certainly not particularly great by any stretch, but there really wasn't anything bad about it either (fifty foot tall women roped to masts, coughAtWorld'sEndcough). Sort of the CoD4 of Pirates.
One thing though: this was supposed to be set before the trilogy, yes? Hence why they "act like the first three movies never existed?" That's what I was picking up, at least.
EDIT: Ah, that's right, they raised the Pearl in At World's End. Okay, I was under the impression it was a prequel the whole time, and it honestly worked pretty well. I was half-expecting it to end with them finding Cortez's gold or something.
One thing though: this was supposed to be set before the trilogy, yes? Hence why they "act like the first three movies never existed?" That's what I was picking up, at least.
EDIT: Ah, that's right, they raised the Pearl in At World's End. Okay, I was under the impression it was a prequel the whole time, and it honestly worked pretty well. I was half-expecting it to end with them finding Cortez's gold or something.