Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End
May. 30th, 2007 02:53 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ivyficI enjoyed this film a lot. It was a hell of a lot better than the second one. But it was like a mosaic—all the little tiles were beautiful and perfect, but if you pull back to look at the whole picture, it just doesn't work. From a fannish perspective, I like what happened with the world and the characters. But as a movie, it didn't quite hang together. It had no dramatic arc (or rather, four or five of them working independently) and I ended up walking out of the theatre feeling like I'd been sitting there for twice as long as I had been.
A few quick points:
-I find Will to be a one-dimensional whiner. Even when he tries to double-cross people, he sucks at it. And though he is a pretty pretty boy, he is so not up to par with Elizabeth. Most of this I'm going to blame on Orlando Bloom and his lack of chemistry with other actors, particularly with his father in the film. That being said, it makes perfect sense that he ends on the Dutchman. He's the only character stupid and idealistic enough to actually do that job. Jack as the captain would have been a disaster. I've seen some discussion that Jack gave up his chance at immortality to save Will's life, but to me, it didn't look like he was going to take it anyway. If his primary goal was to save Will, he would have stabbed the heart before Davey Jones had a chance to stab Will. He hesitated. I think he knew he couldn't be the Dutchman's captain and immortality won that way would be torture. Will being stabbed just presented an elegant solution. That's my take, anyway.
-WTF Norrington? He was such a conniving delightful bastard in the last film and in this one he's a patsy? I don't believe he's that naïve, not anymore. It didn't ring true to me that after everything he'd been through to regain his status he would be so blindly obedient. But I recognize that spending any time on him would have slowed down the rest of the film, and with the position he was in in this movie, he needed to die.
As we were leaving the theater, my sister-in-law pointed out that there are only two women in this film, which is true. What do you want from a pirate film, right? But I find both these portrayals of women problematic. Both Elizabeth and Tia Dalma are on the surface presented as powerful women, but the film went out of its way to put that power in terms of men's desire.
Take Tia Dalma. She's a pagan goddess, a kick-ass one at that. BUT she has been completely confined and limited by the power of men (the nine pirates) and the betrayal of one man in particular. When Davey Jones asks why she wasn't there for him she says it was her nature. Story-wise this is a beautiful answer. But it plays into every stereotype about sexually powerful women: she is faithless, fickle, petty, ungrateful, spiteful.
Then there's Elizabeth. In a lot of ways, this film is Elizabeth's story. She becomes the pirate king, captain of her own ship, fights as hard as any of the men. But have you noticed that almost every man in this series has wanted her? Will, Jack, Barbossa, a whole ship full of pirates, Norrington, and now Sao Feng. And the scene between Sao Feng and Elizabeth really bothered me.
Unlike the other men, Sao Feng gives a reason other than desire for wanting Elizabeth—he thinks she is Calypso. When he first asked for her as part of the deal, I rolled my eyes. I was so proud of Elizabeth for standing up, for telling Will that he didn't need to protect her honor. What she did was her decision, it was not in the custody of someone else, even someone as well-meaning as Will. And the scene on Sao Feng's ship started well. They were talking as equals, as supplicant to goddess. Elizabeth may not have known what he was on about, but she caught on fast and used it to her advantage.
And then Sao Feng tried to rape her. Was that necessary? Did they have to show that Elizabeth could not defend herself from unwanted advances and the only reason she wasn't raped was because of good timing? That felt like a slap in the face, like the writers were putting this strong female character back in her place. It undercut everything they'd built up so far. Yes, she has a strong will and can stand on her own…but she's still weaker than the men-folk, so there.
The previous film also had a moment like this. Elizabeth escapes, dresses as a boy, manipulates an entire ship of sailors without having to seduce anyone—good so far. But then when Will, Jack and Norrington are having their big swordfight, she throws a hissy fit. She has a complete tantrum there on the beach. And yes, it was funny. But it lessened her as a character. She's screaming about the posturing of the men but at the same time completely failing to take advantage of it or to protect the chest herself. Again I say—was that necessary?
For the most part, Tia Dalma and Elizabeth are strong female characters. I could perhaps overlook these parts of their portrayal except that they are the only women in the film.
Then there's the button after the credits. Elizabeth ends the movie as a pirate king with her own loyal ship and crew. But ten years in the future, we see her waiting on the bluff with her son for the return of her husband like a fisherman's wife. There's nothing in that to say she hasn't been spending the last ten years having raucous adventures, but the image itself is one of a domestic, house-broken woman waiting patiently for the return of her adventurous husband. (I'm also not looking for to the prominent presence of a ten-year-old in the hinted at fourth film. I'm sure![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
feiran agrees with me.)
So in conclusion: good film, some problems, nowhere near as good as the original. I'm waiting to see how it shakes out in the fandom. I think I'd actually prefer to look at fic that only treats the first film as canon, though.
A few quick points:
-I find Will to be a one-dimensional whiner. Even when he tries to double-cross people, he sucks at it. And though he is a pretty pretty boy, he is so not up to par with Elizabeth. Most of this I'm going to blame on Orlando Bloom and his lack of chemistry with other actors, particularly with his father in the film. That being said, it makes perfect sense that he ends on the Dutchman. He's the only character stupid and idealistic enough to actually do that job. Jack as the captain would have been a disaster. I've seen some discussion that Jack gave up his chance at immortality to save Will's life, but to me, it didn't look like he was going to take it anyway. If his primary goal was to save Will, he would have stabbed the heart before Davey Jones had a chance to stab Will. He hesitated. I think he knew he couldn't be the Dutchman's captain and immortality won that way would be torture. Will being stabbed just presented an elegant solution. That's my take, anyway.
-WTF Norrington? He was such a conniving delightful bastard in the last film and in this one he's a patsy? I don't believe he's that naïve, not anymore. It didn't ring true to me that after everything he'd been through to regain his status he would be so blindly obedient. But I recognize that spending any time on him would have slowed down the rest of the film, and with the position he was in in this movie, he needed to die.
As we were leaving the theater, my sister-in-law pointed out that there are only two women in this film, which is true. What do you want from a pirate film, right? But I find both these portrayals of women problematic. Both Elizabeth and Tia Dalma are on the surface presented as powerful women, but the film went out of its way to put that power in terms of men's desire.
Take Tia Dalma. She's a pagan goddess, a kick-ass one at that. BUT she has been completely confined and limited by the power of men (the nine pirates) and the betrayal of one man in particular. When Davey Jones asks why she wasn't there for him she says it was her nature. Story-wise this is a beautiful answer. But it plays into every stereotype about sexually powerful women: she is faithless, fickle, petty, ungrateful, spiteful.
Then there's Elizabeth. In a lot of ways, this film is Elizabeth's story. She becomes the pirate king, captain of her own ship, fights as hard as any of the men. But have you noticed that almost every man in this series has wanted her? Will, Jack, Barbossa, a whole ship full of pirates, Norrington, and now Sao Feng. And the scene between Sao Feng and Elizabeth really bothered me.
Unlike the other men, Sao Feng gives a reason other than desire for wanting Elizabeth—he thinks she is Calypso. When he first asked for her as part of the deal, I rolled my eyes. I was so proud of Elizabeth for standing up, for telling Will that he didn't need to protect her honor. What she did was her decision, it was not in the custody of someone else, even someone as well-meaning as Will. And the scene on Sao Feng's ship started well. They were talking as equals, as supplicant to goddess. Elizabeth may not have known what he was on about, but she caught on fast and used it to her advantage.
And then Sao Feng tried to rape her. Was that necessary? Did they have to show that Elizabeth could not defend herself from unwanted advances and the only reason she wasn't raped was because of good timing? That felt like a slap in the face, like the writers were putting this strong female character back in her place. It undercut everything they'd built up so far. Yes, she has a strong will and can stand on her own…but she's still weaker than the men-folk, so there.
The previous film also had a moment like this. Elizabeth escapes, dresses as a boy, manipulates an entire ship of sailors without having to seduce anyone—good so far. But then when Will, Jack and Norrington are having their big swordfight, she throws a hissy fit. She has a complete tantrum there on the beach. And yes, it was funny. But it lessened her as a character. She's screaming about the posturing of the men but at the same time completely failing to take advantage of it or to protect the chest herself. Again I say—was that necessary?
For the most part, Tia Dalma and Elizabeth are strong female characters. I could perhaps overlook these parts of their portrayal except that they are the only women in the film.
Then there's the button after the credits. Elizabeth ends the movie as a pirate king with her own loyal ship and crew. But ten years in the future, we see her waiting on the bluff with her son for the return of her husband like a fisherman's wife. There's nothing in that to say she hasn't been spending the last ten years having raucous adventures, but the image itself is one of a domestic, house-broken woman waiting patiently for the return of her adventurous husband. (I'm also not looking for to the prominent presence of a ten-year-old in the hinted at fourth film. I'm sure
feiran agrees with me.)So in conclusion: good film, some problems, nowhere near as good as the original. I'm waiting to see how it shakes out in the fandom. I think I'd actually prefer to look at fic that only treats the first film as canon, though.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-05-30 08:31 pm (UTC)I'm still trying to work out who was playing whom in this movie (didn't see it under the best of conditions to sort that), and to me, that's a failing. There are too many double-crosses, half-hearted alliances, etc to make sense. I do agree that Norrington was butchered as a character to make way for angst, though his death was probably the most moving thing in the whole film for all the dignity that accompanied it. Will's "death" on the other hand...I was sympathetic and I appreciated that he didn't get to make any elaborate speeches (the less Orlandno Bloom and Keira Knightly have to pretend to like each other, the better) and it sucks that he was stabbed (that really came out of nowhere, I liked it), but otherwise...meh?
I don't get the whole curse thing much either.
As for Elizabeth's character, her ability to play her audience is fine, but it cribbed too much on Jack's ability to do the same (his most endearing character trait in the first movie is his inexplicable talent for playing a crowd, even a hostile one), so it was scaled back so as not to challenge his where they could get away with it. When Elizabeth and Jack come up against each other, Jack doesn't triumph like he does with everyone else. To compensate, they usually put Elizabeth at a disadvantage with regards the rest of the characters (her dependent love of the most inept pirate EVER, the fact that her femaleness leaves her vulnerable to sexual predation, that no one immediately recognizes her power for the same reason of gender, etc.) that makes her feel an uneven player in these games (whereas Jack is purposefully uneven--'cause he's nuts--and is therefore excused).
It will never be as good as the first one, but I knew that when they made these sequels. There is exactly one way to make sequels to one-hit, unexpected wonders like Pirates, and that is to make the sequels serials--contained individual adventures with conclusive endings to the problems that have arisen within the film but with openings for further adventures featuring the same characters (the James Bond/comic book superhero type of sequel). Always a new bad guy, maybe one or two held over from the first installment, fine. When you introduce a new bad guy who is not even hinted at maybe possibly existing somewhere in the new world order of the first film and then he's the motivating force behind all the betrayals et al of two of the films in a trilogy, the three films do not hold together as such (this would be The Matrix Sequel Effect). Instead, you have one really stellar break-out movie and two knock-offs with a cliffhanger to bind them. To me, the sequels to The Curse of the Black Pearl have NOTHING to do with that movie. But they keep trying to invoke it in the repetition-killed "humor" (if I hear the line about the rum being gone ONE MORE TIME....) and allusions to events in those films. It keeps interrupting what would otherwise be serialized sequels by going "Hey! Remember the first movie?"
no subject
Date: 2007-05-30 09:00 pm (UTC)Not to mention the small eternity we spent watching Johnny Depp mug to the camera in Davy Jones's locker. We get it, it's purgatory, move the fuck on. I might even appreciate it more if I saw this as a reflection on Jack Sparrow working up through the ranks or a Captain Jack Sparrow fully in control of his ship, but it clearly wasn't. They spent too long dwelling on the oddness. I got the point fairly quickly. It started to feel like I was the one in purgatory, lost forever without motion of the plot.
There was one reference to the ride I really liked (in the blackness before we get to Davy Jones' locker, the voices saying, "Dead men tell no tales"). But most of the other references were rehashes or retcons of the first film.
I think you're right about Elizabeth usurping Jack's power. But Jack isn't even in this film all that much. I forgot to mention in my feminist rant that Elizabeth only defeats Jack in the last film by kissing him. Her power is again completely defined by her desirability to men.
And I was too distracted by the attack of the fifty-foot woman (ohnoes! It's Clash of the Titans!) to even notice the black woman in chains thing.
On the scale of third films in series, this is somewhere above Back to the Future III and way way above the Matrix sequels. But it's another case of me being annoyed that my views of the characters and the world are tainted by the later films and can never be as full of possibility as they were after the first film. /ramble
no subject
Date: 2007-05-30 10:00 pm (UTC)-I, too, enjoyed the more overt homages to the ride. Especially since I'd been on it recently enough to remember them.
-The Davy Jones' locker thing was adequately surreal, but the problem was taking it OUT of there and bringing in Sholder Jack Angel and Shoulder Jack Devil. That bit of green-screening was REALLY distracting. Also, not funny that they weren't identifiably different as angel/devil. Why do they imagine the audience is somehow unaware of Jack's vanity that they'd both look EXACTLY the same, which is EXACTLY like him?
-Jack's diminuition as a character is the problem with the sequels. Will and Elizabeth just weren't ever as interesting as this sun-stroked pirate who might just have been a crazy genius. They're archetypes well known. The fun of Jack was that he was unpredictable and over-the-top to the point that he came around again as fresh and great.
Better than Matrix sequels? Yeah, probably. This one had Geoffrey Rush rolling his eyes.