>we won't be woke, we will just accidentally cast more non-white, women, trannies and disableds in our movies. Purely coincidence
The same shit as "I don't see colour"
To make something good you need to take risks and have freedom to make such decisions, neither of which is allowed in the era of bloated budgets and twitter activism. The first Pirates was a huge risk for Disney at the time and could have ruined the career of everyone involved, but it worked out in the end.
They still come out with similar types of movies every so often, most of them just suck. The recent dnd movie was a solid comfy adventure movie that felt like something that would've released in the 2000s.
The streaming model metrics are easily obscured, heavily centralized and thus completely politicized, writer strikes lowered quality of everything and investment funds have too much influence over studio decisions.
The first 3 are the Holy Trinity, the 4 and 5 have a downgrade but still enjoyable and are masterpiece compared with current Hollywood.
Johnny Depp is literally the God Atlas of the franchise.
Man, I want him back, he represents all the optimism of 90s and early 00s. There is no Pirates without Johnny (ironically in the first one he was a secondary actor).
You know a movie is great when despite seeing hundred times you still enjoy it like the first time.
It's slop because it's all a CGI shitfest. I'd take simple but well choreographed sword fights from the first film or the legendary wheel fight from the second film over the CGI monstrosities any day.
The problem is, all the post-trilogy films starred Jack. They really didn't understand that he was an icing on the cake, a supporting character; too much of him and it's too much, he loses the appeal when he's on screen all the time. It actually would have been great if Jack was like Mad Max and barged into other people's stories in his anthological films. But alas, people in charge were too dumb - 'member jack? Yaay.
i always thought it was bait but why do people think jack is a supporting character?
POTC franchise is about jack adventure, the first movie (curse of the black pearl) is about the black pearl crew and the curse, when theres no will or elizabeth, the fricking poster tells u jack the main character (he in the middle, supporting chars on the side), everything revolves and moves around jack
Jack has very little screen time if you actually watch the film carefully. It's a film about Elizabeth and Will, it's starts with Elizabeth and Will, Jack just literally barges into the story, he's only tangentially related to the plot, he's only in the film at all because Will saves him and makes a pact with him.
4 felt very scaled back compared to the previous three. Everything including the sets felt smaller.
Also this.
The problem is, all the post-trilogy films starred Jack. They really didn't understand that he was an icing on the cake, a supporting character; too much of him and it's too much, he loses the appeal when he's on screen all the time. It actually would have been great if Jack was like Mad Max and barged into other people's stories in his anthological films. But alas, people in charge were too dumb - 'member jack? Yaay.
Yeah that's one of the things about the post-trilogy films that jumps at you - they all look so cheap, even despite their huge budgets. And the scale of the stories is also small, but not in a good way like it's some smaller story that needed to be told, but more like they couldn't think of anything better.
Unlike the original trilogy, which filmed in some amazing looking remote Caribbean locations, 4 and 5 were filmed in Hawaii and Australia respectively. The soul was gone once Verbinski left as director.
>pozzed bullshit about a literal criminal being the main character and indoctrinating a normal upstanding white tradesman and an elite white socialite into his merry band of thievery and racial ambiguity
nah this was a red jolly roger from day 1
probably would've been literal riots if they named it curse of the white pearl
The shitty aspects of piracy was whitewashed completely, Elizabeth still ends up with Will in the end, and while a lot of the upstanding British soldiers and nobles are played as buffoons they're still the good guys you're rooting for in the end. And it's left ambiguous in the first movie if Will and Elizabeth are able to return to relative normalcy.
The difference in looks between the first and second is reminiscient of Harry Potter from Chamber to PoA. Though, the second PotC is still pretty good.
>The difference in looks between the first and second is reminiscient of Harry Potter from Chamber to PoA
Not really. PoA had a completely different look from the warm cozy originals, Dead Man's Chest looks nearly identical to the first film.
>During an interview released on May 2017, David Bailie stated that he found Cotton not speaking a line through the first three films was a problem and left him feeling he had "failed" at the job instead of finding a way to make Cotton more likable and funny even without a voice. "If I just been a little bit more streetwise about movie-making I could have made Cotton a very funny character, but I see that in retrospect. I think Gore saw me as a bit of a pain in the backside. I was intimidated by Gore. That's the long way short of it. I didn't quite hold my own on the social interactive stakes within the business at all. He used to make funny little quips to me like, 'It's not quite the Royal Shakespeare Company is it?' and I would sort of grin sheepishly." After the third film, At World's End, Bailie was ready to speak if he was cast in another sequel and proposed to director Gore Verbinski and writer Terry Rossio a storyline that Cotton could speak all along but had a catatonic fit and simply had refused to speak during the previous films. "I explained this to the writers and they looked at me like, 'Where was he born? What planet was he on?' I took the proposition to Gore and he gave me an even more old-fashioned look."
rewatching these for the 1st time since pre-2010's, am on the 3rd right now. 1st movie is goated, although they spend a lot of time going back and forth from locations. 2nd is great but the plot with will's dad manages to be boring as shit despite stellan skarsgard. also not sure if it was necessary to bring barbossa back. these films drudge up a shitton of nostalgia, really makes me sad while watching them
>also not sure if it was necessary to bring barbossa back
The reveal was great, one of the greatest movie cliffhangers of all time, but they didn't know what to do with him in the third film, let alone the sequels, and ultimately his return hurt the franchise because now you gotta shove not just Jack but also Barbossa into every scene because 'member Barbossa.
>also not sure if it was necessary to bring barbossa back
The reveal was great, one of the greatest movie cliffhangers of all time, but they didn't know what to do with him in the third film, let alone the sequels, and ultimately his return hurt the franchise because now you gotta shove not just Jack but also Barbossa into every scene because 'member Barbossa.
2000s comfy adventure movies...
take me back bros... take me back...
Someone explain to me why we don't get movies like this any more without using the word woke
Jews
Didn't iger say Disney is no longer going to be "woke"? Might take a few years but kino might make a comeback
>Disney is no longer going to be "woke"
And you trusted a israelite?
>we won't be woke, we will just accidentally cast more non-white, women, trannies and disableds in our movies. Purely coincidence
The same shit as "I don't see colour"
>israelite promise
There is no entity in the entire universe that is of less value.
Bob Iger also said lgbtq+, extreme feminism and "diversity" isn't political. So
And also he's a israelite
>Trusting a man named Iger who sports a massive nose
women
To make something good you need to take risks and have freedom to make such decisions, neither of which is allowed in the era of bloated budgets and twitter activism. The first Pirates was a huge risk for Disney at the time and could have ruined the career of everyone involved, but it worked out in the end.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
I JUST LIVE WITH THE PAIN
They still come out with similar types of movies every so often, most of them just suck. The recent dnd movie was a solid comfy adventure movie that felt like something that would've released in the 2000s.
Everything is filmed on a green screen nowadays and created in post, they even cgi in the clothes. It's hard to care.
I mean... That movie was fine but come on it's no pirates of the caribbean. No one's rewatching that dnd movie every year
bump
Blackrock has subverted the free market
should have named themselves Blackwiener
Two strikes led to shittier and shittier writers.
The streaming model metrics are easily obscured, heavily centralized and thus completely politicized, writer strikes lowered quality of everything and investment funds have too much influence over studio decisions.
private equity
low quality writers
lazy filmmakers who like digital
I know anon, i miss the feel of the 2000's too
The first 3 are the Holy Trinity, the 4 and 5 have a downgrade but still enjoyable and are masterpiece compared with current Hollywood.
Johnny Depp is literally the God Atlas of the franchise.
Man, I want him back, he represents all the optimism of 90s and early 00s. There is no Pirates without Johnny (ironically in the first one he was a secondary actor).
You know a movie is great when despite seeing hundred times you still enjoy it like the first time.
except for the stupid walking underwater carrying a boat scene
>iconic kino scene
>stupid
based moron
there's no way that would work, took me right out if the movie
They literally tested it on Mythbusters and it works.
proofs?
>He wants movies to be realistic
Fricking nerd. You know what's even more unrealistic? Ghosts and immortals, guess which movie has both? moron.
>You know what's even more unrealistic? Ghosts and immortals
>he doesn't know
>THE MYTHBUSTERS BUSTED THIS
>THIS IS SO STUPID
>Mythbusters
>Starring the Rape Blob
Next thing you will say is that Davy Jones is stupid because he is cgi
That was either madness or genius
>tfw no stinky capricious sea witch demigod gf
jdimsa
Movies aren't about fun anymore
Was this the last memorable movie theme?
TUN TUNUN TUN TUNUN
The part in the third movie where the music swells while Davy Jones and Sparrow fight on the mast of a ship in the storm is absolute fun kino
It's slop because it's all a CGI shitfest. I'd take simple but well choreographed sword fights from the first film or the legendary wheel fight from the second film over the CGI monstrosities any day.
You, anon. That exact scene?
I agree.
true
I like all 3 originals equally well and dont see where the hate is from. 4 wasnt too bad either. the last pne started to lose me a bit
get some taste
I have great taste. Im sorry your taste buds are fried
>n-no U
4 wasn't that bad, but coming from a trilogy of interconnected movies, 4 felt really weird.
They should have made 4 the start of a new trilogy, but they went for a standalone movie which made it irrelevant for 5
The problem is, all the post-trilogy films starred Jack. They really didn't understand that he was an icing on the cake, a supporting character; too much of him and it's too much, he loses the appeal when he's on screen all the time. It actually would have been great if Jack was like Mad Max and barged into other people's stories in his anthological films. But alas, people in charge were too dumb - 'member jack? Yaay.
i always thought it was bait but why do people think jack is a supporting character?
POTC franchise is about jack adventure, the first movie (curse of the black pearl) is about the black pearl crew and the curse, when theres no will or elizabeth, the fricking poster tells u jack the main character (he in the middle, supporting chars on the side), everything revolves and moves around jack
>there are people this moronic in the world
no wonder the industry is in such a shape
Jack has very little screen time if you actually watch the film carefully. It's a film about Elizabeth and Will, it's starts with Elizabeth and Will, Jack just literally barges into the story, he's only tangentially related to the plot, he's only in the film at all because Will saves him and makes a pact with him.
this
another moron
4 felt very scaled back compared to the previous three. Everything including the sets felt smaller.
Also this.
Yeah that's one of the things about the post-trilogy films that jumps at you - they all look so cheap, even despite their huge budgets. And the scale of the stories is also small, but not in a good way like it's some smaller story that needed to be told, but more like they couldn't think of anything better.
Unlike the original trilogy, which filmed in some amazing looking remote Caribbean locations, 4 and 5 were filmed in Hawaii and Australia respectively. The soul was gone once Verbinski left as director.
I think this movie deserves to be up there with Indiana Jones and Back to the Future. It's perfect.
better imo. back to the future and IJ are pretty mid
go back to twitter
Arrrrrrg
>pozzed bullshit about a literal criminal being the main character and indoctrinating a normal upstanding white tradesman and an elite white socialite into his merry band of thievery and racial ambiguity
nah this was a red jolly roger from day 1
probably would've been literal riots if they named it curse of the white pearl
The shitty aspects of piracy was whitewashed completely, Elizabeth still ends up with Will in the end, and while a lot of the upstanding British soldiers and nobles are played as buffoons they're still the good guys you're rooting for in the end. And it's left ambiguous in the first movie if Will and Elizabeth are able to return to relative normalcy.
The difference in looks between the first and second is reminiscient of Harry Potter from Chamber to PoA. Though, the second PotC is still pretty good.
>The difference in looks between the first and second is reminiscient of Harry Potter from Chamber to PoA
Not really. PoA had a completely different look from the warm cozy originals, Dead Man's Chest looks nearly identical to the first film.
You're a pirate, 'Arry!
BIG
HIT
That Jack Sparrow character introduction is the goat character introduction of all time
>goat of all time
Boats?
Kino
Pirates?
Kino
Skeletons?
Kino
It was a perfect winning formula.
>Keira
Kino.
He already listed skeleton heehee
My exes' favorite moves were the pirates of the Caribbean movies. She had no personality of her own.
That's a nice story you came up with, virgin.
>I can't get a gf therefore no one can.
What's going to blow your mind is that she wasn't my only gf that I've had in my life.
My other exes favorite move was fricking Dante's Peak.
uh-huh
>being this much of an incel
You should stay on /misc/. You homosexuals make excellent company for one another.
mm-hmm
For anyone that’s interested, this is an excellent making of documentary that was included on the deluxe edition of the Dead Man’s Chest DVD:
%3D%3D
>During an interview released on May 2017, David Bailie stated that he found Cotton not speaking a line through the first three films was a problem and left him feeling he had "failed" at the job instead of finding a way to make Cotton more likable and funny even without a voice. "If I just been a little bit more streetwise about movie-making I could have made Cotton a very funny character, but I see that in retrospect. I think Gore saw me as a bit of a pain in the backside. I was intimidated by Gore. That's the long way short of it. I didn't quite hold my own on the social interactive stakes within the business at all. He used to make funny little quips to me like, 'It's not quite the Royal Shakespeare Company is it?' and I would sort of grin sheepishly." After the third film, At World's End, Bailie was ready to speak if he was cast in another sequel and proposed to director Gore Verbinski and writer Terry Rossio a storyline that Cotton could speak all along but had a catatonic fit and simply had refused to speak during the previous films. "I explained this to the writers and they looked at me like, 'Where was he born? What planet was he on?' I took the proposition to Gore and he gave me an even more old-fashioned look."
>Squawk
>Wind in your sails, wind in your sails
rewatching these for the 1st time since pre-2010's, am on the 3rd right now. 1st movie is goated, although they spend a lot of time going back and forth from locations. 2nd is great but the plot with will's dad manages to be boring as shit despite stellan skarsgard. also not sure if it was necessary to bring barbossa back. these films drudge up a shitton of nostalgia, really makes me sad while watching them
>also not sure if it was necessary to bring barbossa back
The reveal was great, one of the greatest movie cliffhangers of all time, but they didn't know what to do with him in the third film, let alone the sequels, and ultimately his return hurt the franchise because now you gotta shove not just Jack but also Barbossa into every scene because 'member Barbossa.
hum