I feel sullied and unusual.

[hafital]

- Still love it. It's crunchy, and salty-sweet. Yum.

- During my first viewing of DMC, the only part of the movie that made me uncomfortable in terms of content and managed to penetrate the happy fog of pretty pirates was the business with the dog at the end of the cannibal island scene, when the natives chase after the dog - also the tag ending after the credits. It was a cheap gag, among other things. The whole cannibal island scene was unnecessary, but being the slut for pirates that I am, I don't mind it being there - historical inaccuracies and stereotypes and all (this is Disney) - because, hey, more pirates for me! I'm rather too easy to please, what can I say.

After watching it a second time, the dog business is still the only part of the film that I could have done without. The rest of the film I cannot regret.

- There are a whole bunch of clues that tell me Elizabeth and Will will not get married. I'm actually sad about this, even being a J/E fan. I like Will and Elizabeth together, quite a bit, and my love for Will continues to grow. Of course, I think they will still be *together*, just not in holy matrimony. How that *together* will be, I'm not sure, what with all these allusions and clues in the film to the end of the age of Pirates, which holds me back from saying they'd be off pirating together, with Capt. Jack.

- Will Turner is rapidly becoming so very interesting. Aside from the pleasure of seeing Orlando do more than stand around and look pretty with a slightly thoughtful expression on his face, it's really great to see the character expand a bit outside of his role. I think I truly loved him at the end of the film, when he catches Elizabeth kissing Jack and then at Tia Dolma's, when his love for her overcomes his anger and bitterness. That "touch of destiny" bodes for much much more from Will Turner - and indeed we haven't seen him come into his own yet. I, for one, can't wait.

- I am even more convinced than before that Norrington knows exactly what he's doing when he hands Cutler Beckett that heart. I think it argues against his intelligence (and he is *smart*. Easily the smartest among the foursome, if not equal to Jack) that he doesn't know what kind of danger he's playing with by giving Beckett that heart. I do think, however, that his own desire for vengeance and retribution and redemption is greater than any concern he might have about it. And *that* is fascinating - that gives him facets and dimensions and makes him infinitely more complex than he was before. I'm not condemning him, nor do I think he's condemning himself, or that he isn't a good man. He's a good man, as good as Jack.

- I still adore the kiss on the Pearl - that was perfect, not only in the act of kissing, but all that that act of betrayal brings to Elizabeth, Jack, and Will. It makes me inexpressibly happy. But! When I first watched DMC I never believed that Elizabeth was actually struggling against an attraction to Jack. I think she was worried that she was, and that what the compass is showing her is what Jack can promise, what Jack represents, and indeed that her heart's desire is to be a pirate (i.e. free). So, when she turns the tables and manacles Jack to the Pearl and learns something of the guilt it takes to be a true pirate, it's a blow and a heavy one, because she got her heart's desire (kinda) and the compass lead her right to it, and it led her *away* from what she thought she had wanted all along -- Will (i.e. marriage). And this lesson, as much as the actual act of kissing Jack, is what's going to break her away from Will, because she cannot be free, cannot be like Jack, and married to Will, at least not in the way marriage was back then. I still think they're going to figure it out, tho, those two. Because she still loves Will and Will still loves her, it's just not simple anymore.

On second viewing, I was actually a bit dissatisfied with the J/E interactions (aside from the kiss!) because much of it comes across as a bit forced, on the part of the writing and performances. Meaning subtlety was lost in the pursuit of camp and humor. But, it was still lovely.

Jack Sparrow: You cannot let him near the chest, man, trust me on this. You can mistrust me or you can mistrust him. Trust Me.



Found on Freedom, J/E archive, which is actually a really annoying website to visit, with excessive pop-ups, just fyi.

Ted Elliott: We didn't intend to have sequels. The first [movie] is a story in and of itself, a sort of capital 'r' romance in the Prisoner of Zenda sense that ends in an idealized love between Elizabeth and Will. So, what happens after that? Ideals are very difficult to [achieve] in this world. It's much more interesting to watch somebody struggle, where it's not so easy to know what's the right thing to do at all times.

Ted Elliott: Well, we're using the same palette that we used in the first movie. But we're definitely using different values in different combinations and, yeah, we actually do set out to suggest the world of pirates is darker. The darkness was implied in the first and we're making it more apparent in the second [picture] because we are ultimately leading to this climax [in the third picture]. It's a far more interesting type of drama to see people operating in this morally ambiguous world.

Terry Rossio: 99 percent of that's correct but Jack has his own internal moral landscape. The choices he makes are not necessarily inconsistent with forming relationships.

Box Office Mojo: Can you give an example of an idea you refused to compromise?
Ted Elliott: In the very first meeting we had on Pirates 2 and possibly Pirates 3, we kind of pitched to Gore, [and producers] Jerry Bruckheimer, Mike Stenson and Chad Oman how the movie ends—I don't want to spoil it—with Jack, Will and Elizabeth. We said 'this is what we want and then in Pirates 3, this happens.' They were like, 'nyahh.' But we've learned an important lesson, which is that the right idea at the wrong time is a wrong idea. So, we stopped and said, 'alright,' and talked about what more we wanted to do with this movie. A couple of weeks later, Gore had come back to those [same] ideas and, now, they're there. There is a point where the writer has to be allowed to take responsibility for the work—or not take responsibility for the movie.

Box Office Mojo: What is the meaning of the series?
Ted Elliott: It's a study of what is a pirate. How free can you really be? What are those trade-offs? Jack kind of represents the ultimate free man—he really has no obligations to anybody, and, obviously, if you make an obligation to somebody, you're limiting your own freedom. But, if you're not willing to limit your own freedom, you can't have those relationships. If you look at Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest from that point of view, you kind of see what really leads to Jack's ultimate fate and why Elizabeth does what she does.
-from boxofficemojo.com

Comments

[klia.livejournal.com]

The only thing that really bothered me was Jack shooting the crow at the very beginning. I hate when killing an animal is used as a gag, because I don't find it the least bit funny. Fortunately, it didn't put me completely off, the way Men in Black did when the poor dragonfly went splat (I didn't walk out, but I sat there seething through the whole movie, and ended up really disliking it).