Just saw the new Pirates movie. Two things stand out: humanoid invertebrates or in some cases, humanoid tidepools, and very bad teeth horrifying for anyone who cares about their embouchure, for which the movie deserves an R rating. Was somewhat long and tedious, though there were a few unnecessary action scenes that, while typical of this genre, were pretty fun to watch. The movie needed more script supervision, or at least some script supervision.
It ended on some cliffhanger very significant to most in the audience (the place was packed like sardines and the young woman in an adjacent chair was at times practically sitting on my lap) but totally lost on me - as I relegated memories of the first movie to my short term memory only.
As to the invertebrate makeup, they did most common epibionts quite well but were severely deficient in echinoderms, which consisted of only one poorly done starfish, to my great disappointment. Echinoids and Holothurians were entirely lacking. And even though the movie takes place in the Caribbean, the epifauna, to my marine biologist’s eyes, looked right out of Ed Ricketts’ Between Pacific Tides.
Based on this scientific finding (and the fact that the “Black Pearl” is really the bark “Lady Washington” based in Seattle), I suspect everything in the movie takes place off the Pacific coast in the vicinity of Humptulips, Washington - not in the Tortugas.
I would just like to add that googling “epibont” is well nigh fruitless so far as solid definitions go. They keep suggesting that I must really mean “epibond”. And Webster’s evidently isn’t as unabridged as it claims.
Actually, the Lady Washington (based in Grays Harbor, WA, not Seattle) was HMS Interceptor in the first movie. The Black Pearl isn’t a real ship; it’s just a movie set.
Can’t really say which one was better as both movies are now relegated to my short term memory and I have other fish to fry. Usually sequels are worse, except in the Star Trek series.
Speaking of fish, after the movie we felt like having some sushi.
Casey
“You could say I am something of a marine biologist”
-John Steinbeck, when asked what he did for a living at a party
This was a long movie. If you aren’t a fan of the genre don’t go. As Casey pointed out, in order to fully appreciate Dead Man’s Chest, one must have a)seen, b)enjoyed, and c)to some extent retained, the content in Curse of the Black Pearl. If these conditions have been met (item “b,” enjoyed, being important,) then you will most likely be entertained by the antics of the characters in DMChest.
Pearl had a tighter storyline. Chest rambled, pulling in threads from Pearl as it went. The rambling was partially explained by the cliffhanger ending which made it clear that Chest was not a complete movie in and of itself, but merely part 1 of a 2-parter.
I particularly enjoyed a swordfight à trois, the appearance of the former Commodore Norrington in considerably rougher condition, and a voodoo diva called Tia Dalma, played by Naomie Harris.
(The movie also explained a nagging question we’d had about what became of Bootstrap Bill, as he’d been undead when he was jettisoned, and would surely still be alive somewhere…)
If you already know that you enjoy immersion in the world of Pirates, you’re likely to be happy. If you’re going as a film critic, you may not.
p.s. If you haven’t watched to the very end of the credits in Pearl–rent the dvd and do so, or you won’t get the monkey part.
For people with any knowledge of the flora/fauna native to an area, movies can be pretty painful. I try hard to maintain a sense of “okay, it’s just a movie”, and to give as much leeway as I can – after all, I want to enjoy myself after forking over $10 for a seat – but sometimes such gaffes just grate so much that they pull you out of the experience, at least for a while.
Macaws and Amazon parrots flying around in Old World-set movies, or cockatoos flying around in supposed South American settings. Indonesian rain forests standing in for Central American ones. New World monkeys running around in African films. Rain-forest dwelling green iguanas sitting on a desert rock in old westerns. Giant Asian scorpions crawling from out of a sun-baked skull in same. Completely docile and harmless corn and garter snakes standing in for Horrifyingly Venomous Serpents anywhere. All of these make any naturalist wince, even when we’re trying hard just to be in the movie moment. It wouldn’t even be all that hard to get the right animals in there, really, but I guess studios must just call an animal wrangler and ask for “ten parrots” without specifying supposed movie location, etc.
It’s just as bad when some character offers a scientific explanation of something-or-other that makes just no sense at all but is clearly meant to be taken seriously. Makes a guy wish he’d majored in English.
The thing that bugs me the most is when they show an eagle flying but use the cry of the red-tailed hawk for the sound. I can understand why – the red-tail’s cry sounds fierce and wild, while the eagle’s actual call just sounds wimpy, but it grates on me every time! And a lot of movies do it.
I don’t know if I’ll see the film, but if I do, the experience will be enriched by this thread–not least by discovering that there is a place named “Humptulips.”
“We’ll put it in the gas chromatograph and see what happens”.
AHHHHH!!! ( or should I say ARRGG!!?)
Yeah - go ahead and stick that chunk of whatever it is in the inlet and see if you get a darn thing coming through the column to the detector! Extraction, what the heck is an extraction? Sample clean up and concentration? Whatever for???
I’ll try to see to it that that’s corrected in the third film. See, I’ve got my role all figured out. I’m going to play Elizabeth’s mother who ran away from her arranged marriage to the gov’nr, to heed the call of the sea…(Answers 2 questions–where’s her mum, and why is she so intrigued by pirates?) Of course she has a history with Cap’t Jack, and probably with Cap’t Jack’s dad (Keith Richards,) as well. And, of course there will be swordplay!
Jerry Bruckheimer hasn’t called yet. I’m waiting.
I would say that it’s not as good as the first one, but still worth seeing.
My impression was that they tried to cram too much in, and a lot that would have tied the scenes together ended up on the cutting room floor. I also ended up rather disliking both Jack and Elizabeth.
What I don’t get is why the monkey is apparently still immortal. Bootstrap Bill is explained, and it’s clear that the other survivors of the cursed treasure are now ordinary mortals, but why is it that the monkey is still, apparently, “undead”?
I’ve seen “Black Pearl” several times, and own the DVD, but really don’t want to sit though the entire credits…could you fill us in?
