[DWF]

http://www.comingsoo...ws.php?id=59039

Quote

This afternoon, Walt Disney Pictures made the big announcement at the D23 Expo that the fourth "Pirates" film will hit theaters in Summer 2011 and be titled Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides.

Speculation has already begun that the subtitle "On Stranger Tides" refers to author Tim Powers' novel with the same name. The following is the official description of the book:

Puppeteer John Chandagnac, who was sailing to Jamaica to get revenge on the uncle who had stolen his father's inheritance, has no choice but to join the buccaneers who have taken him prisoner--and soon, known now as the pirate Jack Shandy, he finds himself learning to survive in a treacherous new world of cutlass-fights, sea-battles, and voodoo magic on sun-blinded tropical islands. The legendary Blackbeard is assembling a ruthless navy of pirates living and undead to voyage to the fabled Fountain of Youth, and Jack Shandy must use magic, swordsmanship, and even his puppeteer skills to free himself and the girl he has fallen in love with from Blackbeard's deadly supernatural domination.

At the end of the third "Pirates" movie, it is shown that both Barbossa (Geoffrey Rush) and Jack Sparrow (Johnny Depp) are next eyeing the Fountain of Youth. Barbossa has "stolen" the Black Pearl back from Sparrow, but Sparrow has cut out the most important part of Barbossa's map to the Fountain of Youth.

I wonder if we'll be seeing Blackbeard in the movie then.

[NeuralClone]

Personally, I think they just should have quit making these movies while they were ahead (i.e., after the first one). The other two movies are certainly entertaining and completely watchable, but they tried way too hard to make them into an epic story. The first movie worked so well because it wasn't really epic. It was just a classic pirate story with a bit of a twist with the strangeness/over-the-top nature of Jack Sparrow. I think they would have been better off doing 3 standalone movies that were loosely connected. Instead they kept trying to up what they did before until it didn't make any sense or led to massive plot holes.

On the other hand, this movie sounds like it might be more standalone-ish, so maybe that will work in their favor.

This post has been edited by NeuralClone: 12 September 2009 - 11:56 AM

[FnlPrblm]

a bit more comical posting of the same announcement which DWF posted.

[Bad Wolf]

NeuralClone, on Sep 12 2009, 09:54 AM, said:

Personally, I think they just should have quit making these movies while they were ahead (i.e., after the first one). The other two movies are certainly entertaining and completely watchable, but they tried way too hard to make them into an epic story. The first movie worked so well because it wasn't really epic. It was just a classic pirate story with a bit of a twist with the strangeness/over-the-top nature of Jack Sparrow. I think they would have been better off doing 3 standalone movies that were loosely connected. Instead they kept trying to up what they did before until it didn't make any sense or led to massive plot holes.

On the other hand, this movie sounds like it might be more standalone-ish, so maybe that will work in their favor.

The second movie was watchable but only just and only because I saw it on demand and didn't spend a cent on it. I didn't think 3 could be worse than 2 but it was. It was almost Transformers bad.

[DWF]

I really liked the first and third movies, the second not as much but I wouldn't mond seeing another one I really enjoyed Captains Jack and Barbossa they really made the first and third movies work IMO.

[MuseZack]

I just confirmed that the new movie is indeed based on Powers' novel. For those of you who are unfamiliar with Tim Powers' work, he's a brilliant, terrific writer. A good place to start is with Anubis Gates, a wonderful urban fantasy that mixes time travel, Egyptian magic, body switching, truly scary villains, and Victorian poetry in one heady brew. I also know that Powers has struggled financially over the years, so this movie will provide a welcome and much deserved boost to a great writer to keep up his good work.

[NeuralClone]

Bad Wolf, on Sep 14 2009, 10:20 PM, said:

The second movie was watchable but only just and only because I saw it on demand and didn't spend a cent on it. I didn't think 3 could be worse than 2 but it was. It was almost Transformers bad.

I liked the third movie until the 40 minutes or so, where they completely and utterly dropped the ball in almost every way. The Calypso plot was a complete joke. All that build up, she finally gets free, and what does she do? She creates a maelstrom and leaves. Oooh, scary! And then the ships pointlessly circle in the maelstrom while shooting at each other. It felt like they had no idea how to conclude the movie, let alone the series. Well, that part of the series I guess.

I actually enjoyed the second movie too but it was just too long. And both the second and third movies seemed to cram most of the action into the last 30 to 40 minutes. They felt horribly unbalanced in that regard, as well as extremely unfocused.

MuseZack, on Sep 14 2009, 11:18 PM, said:

I just confirmed that the new movie is indeed based on Powers' novel. For those of you who are unfamiliar with Tim Powers' work, he's a brilliant, terrific writer. A good place to start is with Anubis Gates, a wonderful urban fantasy that mixes time travel, Egyptian magic, body switching, truly scary villains, and Victorian poetry in one heady brew. I also know that Powers has struggled financially over the years, so this movie will provide a welcome and much deserved boost to a great writer to keep up his good work.

Cool! That's definitely very reassuring.

[Banapis]

MuseZack, on Sep 14 2009, 11:18 PM, said:

I just confirmed that the new movie is indeed based on Powers' novel. For those of you who are unfamiliar with Tim Powers' work, he's a brilliant, terrific writer. A good place to start is with Anubis Gates, a wonderful urban fantasy that mixes time travel, Egyptian magic, body switching, truly scary villains, and Victorian poetry in one heady brew. I also know that Powers has struggled financially over the years, so this movie will provide a welcome and much deserved boost to a great writer to keep up his good work.

Second this recommendation!

The Anubis Gates is a great book and was the first Tim Powers book I had the pleasure of reading. I also believe it won the Philip K. Dick Award the year it came out.

Banapis

[Bad Wolf]

NeuralClone, on Sep 14 2009, 08:38 PM, said:

Bad Wolf, on Sep 14 2009, 10:20 PM, said:

The second movie was watchable but only just and only because I saw it on demand and didn't spend a cent on it. I didn't think 3 could be worse than 2 but it was. It was almost Transformers bad.

I liked the third movie until the 40 minutes or so, where they completely and utterly dropped the ball in almost every way. The Calypso plot was a complete joke. All that build up, she finally gets free, and what does she do? She creates a maelstrom and leaves. Oooh, scary! And then the ships pointlessly circle in the maelstrom while shooting at each other. It felt like they had no idea how to conclude the movie, let alone the series. Well, that part of the series I guess.

I'm a last impressions kind of gal when it comes to story telling. The true mark of great story telling is the story teller's ability/willingness to go for the big payoff even if it's not happy. I'm not saying it has to be unhappy but when you build up to something and then fizzle it it's a lost worse imo than telling a story that's ho hum from the get go. At any rate I hated Davy Jones in the second movie and I hated him in the third and the "triangle" between the big three makes General Hospital look like a scientific study of relationships.

[NeuralClone]

Bad Wolf, on Sep 15 2009, 12:13 AM, said:

I'm a last impressions kind of gal when it comes to story telling. The true mark of great story telling is the story teller's ability/willingness to go for the big payoff even if it's not happy. I'm not saying it has to be unhappy but when you build up to something and then fizzle it it's a lost worse imo than telling a story that's ho hum from the get go. At any rate I hated Davy Jones in the second movie and I hated him in the third and the "triangle" between the big three makes General Hospital look like a scientific study of relationships.

Definitely some good points, and I don't really disagree with you on any of them. I didn't really care for where the story was headed in the second movie either but went along for the ride. It was the antics of Jack Sparrow that ultimately made me come back for the third and helped me get through the movie. Hopefully this new movie will go back to the kind of storytelling that made the first one work so well. Jack Sparrow really isn't a character that works well in giant (ill-conceived) epics. He seems better suited for standalone adventures.

As for the triangle, which I didn't like either, that was nothing compared to Lost. That's dragged out a love triangle for 5 seasons, and will no doubt be bringing it into the 6th. Last season they expanded the yawn-inducing triangle to a love quadrangle (oh, plot twist of epic proportions!). Now THAT'S pure torture.

This post has been edited by NeuralClone: 14 September 2009 - 11:47 PM

[SparkyCola]

Quote

The second movie was watchable but only just and only because I saw it on demand and didn't spend a cent on it. I didn't think 3 could be worse than 2 but it was. It was almost Transformers bad.

Agreed. I LOVED the first one, big time - the film had vivacity, humour, cleverness and Jack Sparrow was just full of win.

But the second... disappointed me. In the first film Jack was a "cowardly fool" who belied a fantastic pirate. In the second and third it was the other way round- it was like Jack was pretending to be a good pirate but belying a cowardly fool, it's a switch which I hated, as a big fan of the first Jack.

The relationship between the three made perfect sense in the first film - but not the second. At the end of the first film they trusted and liked each other. In 2 and 3 it's like they went back to the start every time and the characters just behaved any way that fit the plot without regard for their character integrity at all.

They had good points, they were both fun. But for me characterisation is really important, perhaps the most important thing of all.

Sparky

[Bad Wolf]

NeuralClone, on Sep 14 2009, 09:47 PM, said:

As for the triangle, which I didn't like either, that was nothing compared to Lost. That's dragged out a love triangle for 5 seasons, and will no doubt be bringing it into the 6th. Last season they expanded the yawn-inducing triangle to a love quadrangle (oh, plot twist of epic proportions!). Now THAT'S pure torture.

As you know, I have no use for Lost.

[DWF]

NeuralClone, on Sep 14 2009, 11:38 PM, said:

Bad Wolf, on Sep 14 2009, 10:20 PM, said:

The second movie was watchable but only just and only because I saw it on demand and didn't spend a cent on it. I didn't think 3 could be worse than 2 but it was. It was almost Transformers bad.

I liked the third movie until the 40 minutes or so, where they completely and utterly dropped the ball in almost every way. The Calypso plot was a complete joke. All that build up, she finally gets free, and what does she do? She creates a maelstrom and leaves. Oooh, scary! And then the ships pointlessly circle in the maelstrom while shooting at each other. It felt like they had no idea how to conclude the movie, let alone the series. Well, that part of the series I guess.

I didn't think the maelstrom was meant to be scary unless you were a very young child, I loved the battle between The Flying Dutchman and The Black Pearl, it was fun, chaotic, funny at times and full of action just what they climax of the movie needed. And I do think the finale came together rather well, I can't say of that of the second act. I thought it was a great way to end the trilogy, except for the fact that I don't think I can get used to the idea of Will Turner's Locker.

This post has been edited by DWF: 15 September 2009 - 04:05 PM

[NeuralClone]

^ I wasn't trying to say that it was supposed to be scary. I was being sarcastic. I thought it was so far in the opposite direction that it was downright laughable, and not in a good way. It made zero plot sense and it made Calypso seem incredibly weak for a supposed goddess. It's a case of lots of build-up and absolutely no follow-through. An excellent example of very poor storytelling.

This post has been edited by NeuralClone: 15 September 2009 - 06:48 PM

[DWF]

NeuralClone, on Sep 15 2009, 07:46 PM, said:

^ I wasn't trying to say that it was supposed to be scary. I was being sarcastic. I thought it was so far in the opposite direction that it was downright laughable, and not in a good way. It made zero plot sense and it made Calypso seem incredibly weak for a supposed goddess. It's a case of lots of build-up and absolutely no follow-through. An excellent example of very poor storytelling.

I think all they had was the ending and the whole battle scene was meanto be over the top which I loved and still do. I can't agree that was an ample of bad storytelling. I thought the ending was pretty satisifing, but only in that was set up thoughout the three movies and it brought in the people.

[szhismine]

i completely love the POTC trilogy, and i can't wait for the next movie.

[NeuralClone]

DWF, on Sep 15 2009, 07:56 PM, said:

NeuralClone, on Sep 15 2009, 07:46 PM, said:

^ I wasn't trying to say that it was supposed to be scary. I was being sarcastic. I thought it was so far in the opposite direction that it was downright laughable, and not in a good way. It made zero plot sense and it made Calypso seem incredibly weak for a supposed goddess. It's a case of lots of build-up and absolutely no follow-through. An excellent example of very poor storytelling.

I think all they had was the ending and the whole battle scene was meanto be over the top which I loved and still do. I can't agree that was an ample of bad storytelling. I thought the ending was pretty satisifing, but only in that was set up thoughout the three movies and it brought in the people.

The reason I didn't the ending is because it didn't follow through with what they had been working so hard to setup in the past two movies. It just fell flat to me I guess. The action was pretty crazy and the ending certainly looked good/was fun to watch (although I still think the two ships circling the maelstrom was silly), but I was really disappointed at the almost complete lack of payoff. There was some but there should have been a whole lot more, IMO.

I think the other main issue I have with the second two movies it that they aren't nearly as grounded in reality as the first movie. Ok, the first movie has undead pirates and the action is pretty ridiculous. Not exactly "reality." But it feels more like a traditional pirate story, albeit with some minor supernatural elements that are there as part of the backdrop. The next two movies get more and more over the top with the supernatural elements until we have an actual goddess, Davy Jones himself, and Jack Sparrow in the underworld. It just goes too far. Those elements are certainly interesting and result in some great scenes, but I would have preferred to have the second two movies stay a bit more grounded.

This post has been edited by NeuralClone: 16 September 2009 - 08:18 AM

[Robert Hewitt Wolfe]

MuseZack, on Sep 14 2009, 08:18 PM, said:

I just confirmed that the new movie is indeed based on Powers' novel. For those of you who are unfamiliar with Tim Powers' work, he's a brilliant, terrific writer. A good place to start is with Anubis Gates, a wonderful urban fantasy that mixes time travel, Egyptian magic, body switching, truly scary villains, and Victorian poetry in one heady brew. I also know that Powers has struggled financially over the years, so this movie will provide a welcome and much deserved boost to a great writer to keep up his good work.

Very good news! Tim is a good guy and a terrific author, so I hope he's getting a nice fat paycheck for this.