Thinking of adding them to my Netflix queue this week. I like Johnny Depp, so this is probably a no-brainer.
Still, for some reason, I’ve never had the urge to watch the movies themselves. Worthy of a rent?
I loved the first one - it was fun and entertaining. I’d definitely recommend it.
I found the second one to be *meh * - I kept wondering when it was going to be done.
I thought the first one was hugely entertaining. I thought the second was stupid, incoherent, and too long.
There’s nothing wrong with the second one, in my opinion. Most people’s problem with it is that it takes a slight shift into different territory with a lot of twists and double crosses. And the third has even more of that.
But the worst I can say about it is it suffers from ‘middle part of a trilogy’ syndrome, with a sort of incompleteness to it. Which of course it ought to, as that’s how the best trilogies work.
I didn’t really like either of them so far, and I’m totally on board with mindless, fun entertainment. They just didn’t do it for me at all. And I do love Johnny Depp, too. Still, everyone else seems to love them, so give 'em a go.
They are pirate movies, and they are not R-rated. What do you think?!
Agreed. The original is one of my most favorite movies ever and I don’t even like pirate movies. The second and third bored me to tears, though.
first one > good, fun, entertaining
second one > first 25 mins are fun then it draaaggggsssssss…
third one > much better then the second but it lacked the originality of the first
Surprisingly, I loved the first one (thanks to Johnny Depp).
The second one was okay, I guess. I still loved Depp’s character.
I enjoyed both of 'em. Like almost everyone, I found the first to be better than the second. The first movie stands well on its own; I didn’t really feel the need for a sequel when I saw it. Once the sequel came down the pike, it seemed a good deal more contrived and less fun than the first, as is often the case with sequels to hugely-successful films. Thank goodness there wasn’t a Titanic 2.
The amazing thing was that the first one was any good at all, let alone really great (as it was), considering it was produced by schlockmeister Jerry Bruckheimer and as one in a series of films inspired by Disney’s theme park attractions. (Remember that the Country Bears and the Haunted Mansion movies were also in this series.)
I didn’t think the third one was bad – much better than the second. I agree with gatorman’s assessment.
The first one was brilliant.
The second one was half a movie, despite its length. This makes it feel even longer in retrospect.
That expression may seem funnier after you see the third movie.
Love the first one - have seen it dozens of times. I think Depp, Rush, Davenport, and Price were brilliant. Its just a really fun action film with some great performances.
The second one - not so great. It’s somewhat drawn-out and boring, with replays of some of the gags and action sequences from the first film. It suffers from what I call “sequel exponentialism,” where the filmmakers take a successful component from the first film and multiply it for the sequel. Thus they say, “A sword fight while balancing on rafters was fun in the first film, so lets have a sword fight while balancing on a moving mill wheel in the sequel!” or “Jack Sparrow running away from soldiers through an obstacle course was fun in the first film, so lets have him running away from natives through an even more outrageous obstacle course in the sequel!” It would have been better to generate some new ideas.
I haven’t seen the third film yet, though I’m sure I will. I just don’t hold out much hope for it after the second film disappointed me so.
I hope the person who made the original post here will go out and rent the first “Pirates of the Caribbean”. It is a wonderful, fun movie-movie. It is one of my all time favorites. and Johnny Depp deserved the acting awards and nominations he received for it.
So yes, yes, yes it’s worth it.
The sequels I can take or leave.
What **Lou **said.
I love the first one, because it never takes itself too seriously: it feels like all those involved were having a lot of fun making it. The second one just feels like they tried to make a copy of the first, but without any of the same feeling going into it – they ae just going through the motions, and working to a formula, rather than making fun of the formula as the first one does.
Like almost everyone else, I found the first one to be unexpectedly wildly entertaining and the second one like being beaten with a frying pan. The problem with it is definitely not that “it takes a slight shift into different territory with a lot of twists and double crosses.” It’s that it totally lacks the wit and lightness of the first. Twists and double crosses would be great. Incoherent special effects and giant piles of glop weren’t.
The first one was the best drive-in movie I’ve ever seen. The second one is on my Netflix queue.