Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by BeBro
I read a German review saying it's a great critique of globalization.

wtf?

[lord of the mark]

the East India Company is the bad guys.

Can't think what else it would be.

[Kuciwalker]

Aren't they the bad guys because one of their middle management wanted the still-beating heart of a dead pirate? A bit of a stretch...

[Hueij]

Is this the one with Keith Richards?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Well, I think the second movie shows that the East India Trading Company was even more powerful than the government. Specifically they were able to make the Governor of Port Royale turn over all of his power to them. There was also that speech by Lord Beckett that the currency of the realm is no longer loyalty, but currency itself (kind of channeling Gordon Gecko and the Greed is Good sentiment).

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Aren't they the bad guys because one of their middle management wanted the still-beating heart of a dead pirate?

You dont know those neocons, do you?

[DaShi]

Watching an illegal DVD of the a movie that has yet to be released in cinemas worldwide and then spoiling it for everyone else.

[Gatekeeper]

I'm debating about going to the 8 p.m. or 11:30 p.m. show tonight.

I'm leaning toward the latter, with the slight hope that it'll be a tad bit less crowded than the earlier show (the last time I made this calculation, Spider-Man III, the midnight showing was packed). Only bad thing is, you can't get refills on large popcorn/soda after the late showing, 'cause the concession stand closes before the movie ends. And since there's no intermission — bring back intermissions! — I guess I'm out of luck because I don't want to miss even five minutes of this film.

Gatekeeper

[-Jrabbit]

I went. Expected romptastic fun. I won't post spoilers this early.
There is a short bit after the credits. Explanatory, not comedic.

Oh, yes -- it's the one with Keith Richards.

Ming was there with his family too.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Serb

Absolutely. If you liked the Indiana Jhones series, you would love it!

This is an inadvertently apt comparison: the first one was terrific, but the second one sucked so bad that I lost all interest in seeing number 3.

[DinoDoc]

Awesome movie. Pure summer fun.

[Robert]

I think I loved both 1 and 2, the 2nd was better, though it dragged at some spots. (surely at multiple viewings)

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


wtf?

Unbelievable, isn't it?

[Drogue]

Originally posted by Serb
And the story in the third part is even more convoluted. And I liked that.

But in the third one it works. In the second, the convoluted plot without a decent ending meant you were left unsure of why the characters did things, they just didn't seem quite in character. I mean, why would Will have wanted to save Jack just after seeing Elizabeth kissing him? It didn't make sense, until Will revealed why in the third film.

Three was good though. Much funnier than either of the others, tied it up nicely, while still leaving a gap open for the forth. The telescopes and the midget with the cannon at the beginning were especially good.

[Drogue]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
The second was good. It was just burdened by being the middle part of a trilogy hence lots and lots of loose ends.

While this may be true, I don't think that absolves the film. It is possible to make a middle-of-a-trilogy that doesn't leave silly loose ends, but still leaves it open for the third. Take the Godfather, Star Wars or Lord of the Rings - the middle films there are simply great films. It is perfectly possible to make a great 2nd film, but they just messed up with Pirates.