I
recently wrote about watching the second Pirates of the Caribbean movie at home, and being reasonably impressed. This inspired me to see "At World's End" last night at the cinema.
Unfortunately, while not a complete waste of time, it is the weakest of the three movies.
As many reviewers have complained, its main problem is with clumsy plot exposition. Books about screen writing invariably mention at some point how cinema is primarily a visual medium which should
show the plot, not have the characters standing around explaining it. It's as if the screen writers for Pirates have just completely forgotten this by the third film. I find it puzzling that they could not see the deficiencies of the screenplay in this respect.
The whole Davy Jones/Calypso background seems a complete waste of time, and I would have thought that the use of flashback would have been much better. (And surely it is not hard to fit in flashback by use of some magical device in this type of movie.)
It's also ironic how in my post about the second movie, I noted the impressive naturalism of the special effects. I specifically mentioned my dislike of scenes where is clear that the number of things in a shot (ships, people, whatever) have just been
multiplied by effects.
Well, "At World's End" does this several times, and also has what I complained about in the last Star
Wars films: backgrounds which are clearly all one special effect.
Now, some of the effects are still often very impressive for their type. It struck me that it took some chutzpah for all involved (the screenwriters, the movie producers, director and special effects team) to even decide at the start that they could make the climatic battle work. (The sequence involves two ships fighting each other while both swirling around the mouth of a gigantic maelstrom, and it really is a triumph for a realistic rendering of such a fantasy ocean sequence.)
Like I said, it's not a complete waste of time, but it continues the tradition of the last few years of my wife and I going to see only about one movie a year at the cinema, and being a bit disappointed with it.
UPDATE: I forgot to mention three other things about the movie:
1. the way they get out of Davy Jones locker (which is sort of like purgatory, I suppose) seemed quite appropriate, and it was an impressive sequence.
2. The talk of the
green flash interested me, because I am not sure that many people would have heard of it as a real phenomena. (It appears in astronomy and other books, but I doubt it gets a mention in anyone's school education.) It is the type of thing that I imagine would seem mystical to sailors of old, so I thought that was an intelligent bit of writing.
3. Keith Richard's face looks easily 50 years older than the rest of his body.