Very short scene with the cannibals dancing around. Camera pans over to teh throne where the dog they chased earlier is now sitting on the throne with a large bone in his mouth. The End.
Oh, I understood that. It doesn’t really respond to the point, though.[spoiler]Yes, it was consistent with what Jack predicted, although it went beyond what might have been expected. It also may play into an Elizabeth becomes the new pirate captain piece of the next film. I am presuming that when the magic compass was pointing at Jack, it was suggesting not that Elizabeth wants Jack, but that she wants what he has or what he is. Yo ho ho, a pirate’s life for me, and all that.
Still doesn’t mean that as a character who was supposed to be a likable protagonist, it is reasonable for her to recover from having chained a person up to be Kraken meat so that everyone else can get away. Especially when that character just came back in order to save everyone else. (Although he ended up doing nothing but taking the gun away from Elizabeth to do what she presumably could do herself.)
On a lesser note, I thought that the film was pretty callous about the crew of the other ship eaten by the Kraken. They do a good deed of picking up Will Turner adrift at sea, and end up being eaten for their troubles, while Will gets away. Perhaps that crew will be magically saved when Jack cuts his way out of the Kraken, but all in all these two things were pretty callous for a fun loving adventure romp. No good deed goes uneaten, or something like that.[/spoiler]
My main question is how the timeline works and the events therin.
We know that apporzimately 13 years ago, Capt. Jack promised his soul to Jones to be a ship captain for 13 years, yet after just a couple he was mutineyed and Barbosa took over. After that, they stole the gold and were cursed. Bootstrap was saying how it was a bad idea after the fact, so Boostrap was thrown overboard with a cannon strapped to his bootstrap. So how did Will get the coin? Will made it seem like he never knew his father, and believed he was an honest sailor, yet when he was given the coin and scuttled off the ship, he was somewhere between eight and twelve years old. He couldn’t have been any younger, because Will is clearly in his early or mid twenties. Yet he claims to not have known his father. Something doesn’t add up here.
And as to Bootstrap, since we see him alive, we know he managed to crawl onto land at some point while cursed and when everyone else was uncursed, so was he (though why his son’s blood works and his is not needed is kind of a cheap trick, but I’ll let it pass.) So at some point between PotC and PotC2, he got his way back onto a ship but then became a member of Davy Jones’s crew.
Was he one of the few sailors that Will found shipwrecked that agreed to join the crew, or was he a member of the crew before that? And how does the years of service work? I know that they said you pledge X amount of years (default seems to be 100, but if you’re good at liar’s dice, you can get out in a day, :p) but then it seemed like Boostrap was saying when you’re done, you become like the face on the wall, ie, a part of the ship. Or is that just what happens towards the end of your service, and when you’re done, poof, back to a human and on your merry way?
It was explained in the first movie that Bootstrap sent the coin to his son in England. Sometime between them stealing it and him being thrown overboard.
We never see him alive.
I know he explained what precisely happened, but the main gist is he was dead/dying and Davy Jones offered him 100 years of servitude to put off facing eternal judgement. Also Bill stated that spending too much time on the ship makes you mutate more. If you watch carefully, Bill is slowly growing more sea fauna on his face as the movie progresses.
Davy Jones’s crew aren’t undead, they are just…umm…mutated…and slightly immortal (enough to live for a hundred years, but they seem to be able to be killed with a sword.) So he is, technically, alive.
Thanks for the other answers. I haven’t seen the first movie in a while, so I guess I assumed he gave it to his son personally, instead of sending it away.
He wasn’t dead or dying - he was trapped at the bottom of the ocean, suffering and unable to die like Haley Joel Osment in some unruined version of A.I.. 
Bootstrap tells Will that he promised himself he would take any avenue of escape that came along. So somehow, Jones became aware that Bill was stuck there (like the Devil in so many stories knows when somebody is prepared to sell his soul in a moment of weakness, I guess) and freed him in return for the 100 years.
Actually, this was a big sticking point for me in the first film, when Jack set up that ship full of British soldiers to get massacred by the zombies. The character is supposed to be this “lovable knave” type, then he does this remarkably cruel thing, and the movie didn’t seem to register the disconnect.
I don’t think that Jack intended for that to happen. He apparently intended for all the soldiers to stay aboard the ship and blast the pirates with cannons when the pirates come out of the cave in rowboats. With the pirates out in the open, he and Will would break the curse and the soldiers would be able to easily handle the now mortal pirates.
Jack’s plan gets messed up by both the pirates and the soldiers. The British officers don’t trust Jack (there is a line of dialogue about why they’re not doing what he advised them to do) and so the majority of the soldiers head toward the cave in rowboats. The pirates mess up Jack’s plan by not using their own rowboats to head out to attack the British ship. Jack specifically tells them to take their boats, but Barbossa tells his pirates to “take a walk” and they wind up sneaking up on the ship from underwater and overpowering the small contigent of soldiers that were left on the ship.
That’s my take on it. You could also argue that Jack was just playing both sides against each other for his own gain, perhaps intending to make his escape on the Black Pearl in the resulting chaos.
My wife and I liked it, her more than me. I love the first one and felt this one was clearly rushed.
I know they had major delays during filming and it could be seen. Cheers to Gore for getting this movie out on time anyway.
I predict the third will be better.
I liked it, but not as much as the original. As others have said, I thought it was rushed and had too many storylines. I had trouble following the plot at some points.
Re: The undead monkey. This is the same monkey (“Jack”) from the first movie, correct? I assumed that it was under the same curse as the skeleton pirates in The Curse of the Black Pearl, which means that it should have turned mortal (like the pirates) when the curse was broken. Why/how is it undead?
There’s a two second clip after the cedits of the first movie, showing the monkey grabbing a coin from the chest again, and scaring the camera.
OK, that makes sense. I really should learn to watch movies all the way through to the end of the credits. 
Thanks!
The boat that blew up in the first movie’s climax?
…still doesn’t explain the appearance of Barbossa!
Overall, a decent movie, went on a little long for me, but I enjoyed it. I did end up wondering about that nagging question, though …
If the Kracken can suck that first pirate ship under the water so easily, why did it bother with the dog and pony show with the following ships? Especially after they used the Black Pearl’s cannons to shoot holes in the tentacles. Wouldn’t it just say “screw that!” and suck the boat under like it did near the beginning?
It’s one of those situations where the only answer is “because it makes for a more exciting film.” The filmmakers would have done well to just do away with the first scene I mentioned in the box above and then there would be no problem.
Yeah, but he’s still essentially responsible for what happens, and that’s a pretty big black mark on the character that’s never addressed or resolved. To me, the whole movie was just really confused about whether to romanticize or villify the pirate characters (including Jack), and that led to some jarring and unsettling shifts in tone.
At least Elizabeth’s act of villainy in the second movie seems to be recognized and portrayed as such.
[Captian Jack Sparrow] Erm, hello…pirate![/CJS]
;j <–Looks sort of like Jack’s headscarf and dreds, no? No, not really.
Yes, I know he’s supposed to do some bad things, being a pirate and all. 
My problem is the way the movie presents Barbossa’s brutal slaughter of innocent bystanders as the act of an evil villain, but when Jack’s action results in similar slaughter… what? He’s still presented as a hero we’re supposed to root for unreservedly. It just doesn’t add up for me.
I wouldn’t call Jack a “lovable knave.” He’s a downright dirty, dispicable, scurvy pirate who’s in it for himself: he doesn’t care that the British soldiers are going to be killed, he just wants his ship back. To him, all went according to plan, even if the plan had to be altered a few times.
The rub for us viewers is that he’s charming and charismatic, even also eloquent in his own way. We tend to forget his villany, especially because it happens in a fast-paced movie. He sicks Norrington on Will to save his own skin, but it happens in the middle of a great swordfight. He was also telling the truth and Will survives, so we forgive and forget. We also are seeing him when he falters from his piratey modus operendi and acts humanely. We are also told in Dead Man’s Chest that Jack is conflicted: …his compass won’t work because he doesn’t know what he wants.
When he and Elizabeth are inches from each other’s lips, she foreshadows his probable redemption by pointing out he wants to know what it feels like to do the right thing.
Although in that case, he doesn’t even try to do the right thing.