First of all I'd like to apologise for my blog's blatant inferiority to the likes of other ONMers. As much as I'd love to take part in the '366in366' challenge, I have neither the library nor the money to support it. In spite of this, I have chosen a much simpler task: to watch one film every week. "=.=
I've seen quite a few films this week, but I'll review the third instalment in the 'Pirates Of The Caribbean' series right now.
The 'Pirates Of The Caribbean' series is one of those franchises which almost lets you forgive Disney for the likes of 'High School Musical' and 'Hannah Montana'. The first film in the pirate trilogy was commended for being one of the only decent films based around our favourite people in the entire world. The second film, 'Dead Man's Chest', wasn't given as much praise as 'The Curse Of The Black Pearl' and 'At World's End' has been criticised as the worst of them all.
To be honest, 'At World's End' is my favourite chapter in the 'Pirates Of The Caribbean' saga, but I'm not even going to try and pretend that it's better than it's predecessors. With only one proper battle (and a few more enjoyable scenes besides), only the greatest of liars could get away with commending 'At World's End' for total superiority over the first two films.
Okay, I suppose maybe I'm being too harsh in what is essentially an enjoyable-enough contribution to anybody's collection of digital versatile discs. And that's exactly what I'm getting at. I believe the main reason 'At World's End' is attacked so critically is because it's being compared with 'The Curse Of The Black Pearl' and associated with the disappointing (and ironically my second-favourite PotC film) 'Dead Man's Chest'. Let's just face it: it's not as good as the first two. Just be thankful that you're getting a good film about pirates.
I suppose 'At World's End''s distinct lack of battles can be justified. While the previous films were semi-frequent with short battles, the main fight in 'At World's End' is about thirty minutes long. The battle is absolutely epic and the main reason why 'At World's End' deserves a place in your DVD collection. The fact that I spent £25 on the Blu-Ray version of this film which I had already seen in the cinema and don't feel ripped off is testament to the film's quality.
If I wanted to be really picky, I suppose I could criticise how little the film benefits from the Blu-Ray format's advantages. 'The Curse Of The Black Pearl' has heaps of extra features, almost 13-hours' worth of the beggars. 'Dead Man's Chest' boasted just over 7-hours' worth of said features, admittedly still an admirable length. You can see the pattern, can't you? 'At World's End''s extra features are insignificant in comparison to its predecessors, although I guess this is where my point that it's not fair to judge 'At World's End' for its predecessors' performances comes in.
Something I'm disappointed in is how damn confusing the film is. The basic plot is that the nine Pirate Lords must offer nine Pieces Of Eight to free the goddess Calypso from her human form. Obviously two of these Pirate Lords are dead, one sealed in Davy Jones' locker, so said goddess needs to revive one and free the other. Meanwhile, the main protagonists' (if you can really call them that) two enemy forces have united.
You'd think said unity would be why the main battle is so epic, but you'd be very wrong. Despite the film's abnormal length, I thought it was a bit rushed, as only three of the several-hundred ships are seen in the fight, which is what I most despised about the film.
'Pirates Of The Caribbean: At World's End' is a really enjoyable film. If you're just looking for an odd film to watch then I highly recommend you give this a try, but if you're expecting something as immense as 'Pirates Of The Caribbean: The Curse Of The Black Pearl' or even 'Pirates Of The Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest' then you will probably be disappointed.
Three Out Of Five.
I've seen quite a few films this week, but I'll review the third instalment in the 'Pirates Of The Caribbean' series right now.
The 'Pirates Of The Caribbean' series is one of those franchises which almost lets you forgive Disney for the likes of 'High School Musical' and 'Hannah Montana'. The first film in the pirate trilogy was commended for being one of the only decent films based around our favourite people in the entire world. The second film, 'Dead Man's Chest', wasn't given as much praise as 'The Curse Of The Black Pearl' and 'At World's End' has been criticised as the worst of them all.
To be honest, 'At World's End' is my favourite chapter in the 'Pirates Of The Caribbean' saga, but I'm not even going to try and pretend that it's better than it's predecessors. With only one proper battle (and a few more enjoyable scenes besides), only the greatest of liars could get away with commending 'At World's End' for total superiority over the first two films.
Okay, I suppose maybe I'm being too harsh in what is essentially an enjoyable-enough contribution to anybody's collection of digital versatile discs. And that's exactly what I'm getting at. I believe the main reason 'At World's End' is attacked so critically is because it's being compared with 'The Curse Of The Black Pearl' and associated with the disappointing (and ironically my second-favourite PotC film) 'Dead Man's Chest'. Let's just face it: it's not as good as the first two. Just be thankful that you're getting a good film about pirates.
I suppose 'At World's End''s distinct lack of battles can be justified. While the previous films were semi-frequent with short battles, the main fight in 'At World's End' is about thirty minutes long. The battle is absolutely epic and the main reason why 'At World's End' deserves a place in your DVD collection. The fact that I spent £25 on the Blu-Ray version of this film which I had already seen in the cinema and don't feel ripped off is testament to the film's quality.
If I wanted to be really picky, I suppose I could criticise how little the film benefits from the Blu-Ray format's advantages. 'The Curse Of The Black Pearl' has heaps of extra features, almost 13-hours' worth of the beggars. 'Dead Man's Chest' boasted just over 7-hours' worth of said features, admittedly still an admirable length. You can see the pattern, can't you? 'At World's End''s extra features are insignificant in comparison to its predecessors, although I guess this is where my point that it's not fair to judge 'At World's End' for its predecessors' performances comes in.
Something I'm disappointed in is how damn confusing the film is. The basic plot is that the nine Pirate Lords must offer nine Pieces Of Eight to free the goddess Calypso from her human form. Obviously two of these Pirate Lords are dead, one sealed in Davy Jones' locker, so said goddess needs to revive one and free the other. Meanwhile, the main protagonists' (if you can really call them that) two enemy forces have united.
You'd think said unity would be why the main battle is so epic, but you'd be very wrong. Despite the film's abnormal length, I thought it was a bit rushed, as only three of the several-hundred ships are seen in the fight, which is what I most despised about the film.
'Pirates Of The Caribbean: At World's End' is a really enjoyable film. If you're just looking for an odd film to watch then I highly recommend you give this a try, but if you're expecting something as immense as 'Pirates Of The Caribbean: The Curse Of The Black Pearl' or even 'Pirates Of The Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest' then you will probably be disappointed.
Three Out Of Five.
No comments:
Post a Comment