Cinema

On Stranger Tides

POSTED BY: Wishimay
UPDATED: Friday, June 10, 2011 23:31
VIEWED: 5501
PAGE 2 of 4

BYTEMITE

Saturday, June 4, 2011 2:46 PM

It almost felt to me like something of the charm was gone this time around, and I'm trying to determine what it is.

Yeah, things weren't explained, though maybe that's intended as a sequel hook. For example, not knowing the origins of Blackbeard's sword will probably come to bite Barbossa. Also the ability to capture ships in a bottle, and how to release them.

The duplicity has always been there, it happens as a matter of fact whenever Cap'n Jack's around. Even the first one had Jack constantly unpredictable and switching sides at least three times. The third movie took it up to eleven.

This one wasn't a bad movie, none of the series have been bad movies so far, but I almost feel like there wasn't as big an emotional hit at the end as there has been. And the plot was predictable.

BYTEMITE

Saturday, June 4, 2011 2:54 PM

DT, I'd agree with that assessment. Though I think that it's not so much that a movie like this shouldn't bring the funny AND the scary, that and the action is what makes it a popcorn cruncher.

When I was trying to figure out what was missing, I thought at first maybe there was less funny dialogue than in the past, but then I realized it's not so much that there was less funny dialogue, but rather the funny dialogue was weak and delivered by characters I'm not familiar with.

The beginning of the movie was pretty bad. It got better about right after Captain Teague. I would have skipped the trial sequence and the getaway from the manor, and started with Captain Jack in the pub and we learn an imposter is recruiting a crew. Keep the part about the fisherman finding the shipwrecked sailor that knows about Ponce de Leon, that sets up the rest of the movie.

DREAMTROVE

Saturday, June 4, 2011 11:04 PM

Unfortunately, I might be to blame for the weak opening of the film. Disney ordered a book from me on Blackbeard, and I found the mock trial sequence in it hysterical, and this was as being transcribed by someone present at the actual mock trial given by Blackbeard, which is actually quite funny, at any rate, I bookmarked the passage and put a note in it saying "I think this is what you're looking for." I can see why they didn't give the scene to Blackbeard because it makes him a little bit less of a dark character, though the book itself was not fiction, neither was the scene, being a first hand account of around the year 1716 and having taken place on one of the southern isles of the Bahamas. The book also contained the bits of him braiding his beard and lighting the braids on fire to spook his enemies, but that information was probably more readily available elsewhere, and I suspect they picked up a fair number of works on the subject (I would hope) before making a film about the man, but part of me knows that Hollywood is not known for the care it takes with subjects. (As withness PotC taking the bislama of Vanuatu and transporting it to Dominica, a detail about which the film makers commented "at the time we thought: Who's going to notice that? The answer was apparently Absolutely Everyone.")

As for the bit about King George, also a bit too farcical. The opening of PotC 1 is only mildly farcical, but it's also rather dark. There's actually scarcely a farcical moment that isn't also actually scary, even Elizabeth falling so very nearly to her death.

There are in this one some out and out writing flaws. I think I spotted two points where characters actually come out with expository monologues. So, yes, I basically agree, clip the trial and king from the beginning of the movie, open with a dark scene on the level of jurassic park or something, where our characters, most of them at least, are not present, and use that dark scene to give us the background that seemed so essential that we resorted to exposition and instead weave it into a sequence involving probably the hunt for the FoY (without actually exposing any later secrets of the film) and then have whatever ill fate befits our misfortunate misadventurers of the opening.

This also might free up some time for more investigation into character relation subplots, which, IMHO, was the stronger part of the film. I saw that the reviews were fairly harsh on the subplots, but I suspect that this was in part because they were only half done, the filmmakers couldn't decide whether they wanted the showstealing subplots to upstage our main characters, and almost seemed afraid of the idea.

Select to view spoiler:

Even past the obvious two subplots, I would have liked things like getting to know the singing saliors a little more.

A couple of other minor issues:

The balanced ship scene is as bad as that wheel scene from PotC2. If a ship were really balanced, it would not be on a pinhead, and as a vessel that size weighs at least 30 tons, it's going to take a little more than that to shift its center of gravity due to friction, etc. It also would have made for a better scene, even if you kept the absurdity, to have it shift position unexpectedly some time after people and items had relocated. That would have been less predictable and more realistic, and would have given the audience a jolt when it happened, esp. if well done. Just at the moment you don't expect it at all, have it shift with a loud ominous sound, etc.

The other one that comes immediately to mind is the cartoon stereotyping of the Spanish, which is almost as bad as the Asians in PotC3, which is probably the single thing about third movie that earned it the razz that it got.

It seems like a strange thing to do when a fairly heavy portion of the cast is Spanish anyway (even the mermaid is Spanish) that the Spaniards when they show up don't just behave like ordinary people. Also, just out of curiosity, here we are in the 1720s or so (despite Jack carrying a pistol from the 1760s) and the

BYTEMITE

Sunday, June 5, 2011 1:39 AM

The opening dark scene you suggest probably could've been the fisherman scene, which is why I thought keep it, but aside from the "dead guy wakes up" moment that I was surprised anyone gasped at, there wasn't enough menace. Maybe open with the wreck of Ponce de Lion, suggest hidden threats in the waters, THEN the guy being found.

The mock trail itself was actually okay as well, because it was mostly Jack and Gibbs. But it just makes more sense to open with Jack at the pub. Then you could have Barbossa in the next scene show up unexpectedly as a privateer threatening Gibbs, and all you'd need there is a one liner from Barbossa saying that he knows Jack left the map with Gibbs for safe keeping (if it's not already present in the scene).

The King George part wasn't good at all... Though I did like the whimsical touch of the danish on the chandelier. But the chandelier swinging and the rest of the escape had problems, and the reactions to the escape were badly acted. Then a soldier drops Jacks affects for Jack to pick up? Come on, that's just lazy.

Maybe if they wanted to use the mock trial scene, they could've combined it with Blackbeard punishing the guy who was supposed to be on watch during the mutiny. It's not a bad idea, they just needed to fit it in better.

I liked the character subplots as well... Kinda on the fence about Jack Sparrow having heart to hearts with Gibbs about women though.

Select to view spoiler:

Jack ditching the girl on the island at the end and his quick "I've got to go" is hysterical though, and almost worth the OOCness

As for stereotyping, I guess you have a point, though I never thought about it like that because I figured in the 1700s that ethnic cultures WOULD be stereotypes, simply because voyage distance prevents a whole lot of mixing of ideas.

DREAMTROVE

Sunday, June 5, 2011 4:30 AM

I don't remember Jack and Gibbs on women, though he does this sort of thing a lot, remember the whole bit with Jack and Will in the first movie (which is a decent portion of the movie maybe)

The mock trial could have worked better, it suffered for me from having read the original, and yes, it would have been much funnier in its place, somewhere in the middle of the movie. I think also, it adds depth to blackbeard (he had a sense of humor) And wasn't really old enough to have Penelope Cruz as a daughter, but nevermind.

The king George scene I thought was just dumb, and weakened the movie.

The after the credits scene I did not think was bad, except that I thought it was OOC. I was sort of ~ahn~ on it. I was expecting a subplot driven after the credits scene.

On stereotypes, people are never that stereotypical. The asians would have been very asian, but they wouldn't have been quite so cartoonish. They would have talked to each other like normal people, and would have already met the English. As for the Spanish, there's no excuse for that, esp. given that so much of the cast is Spanish anyway. Clearly this flaw is in the screenwriting, not the shooting. People on the set are probably speaking Spanish some of the time. It's just a bothersome disconnect that's common to Hollywood.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

BYTEMITE

Sunday, June 5, 2011 4:43 AM

Huh. Well, in my defense, I live in Utah. You could throw anything exotic and historical at me and to me it would seem like a entirely valid representation of a culture at the period and time.

Maybe you're right, though I don't remember it being actual feelings in the previous movies so much as mild jokes about Jack being a womanizer and not entirely trusting women.

DREAMTROVE

Sunday, June 5, 2011 3:26 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Huh. Well, in my defense, I live in Utah. You could throw anything exotic and historical at me and to me it would seem like a entirely valid representation of a culture at the period and time.

Yes, this is exactly the problem. When I was in Iowa it was much the same way. It's not a problem with Iowa or Utah, it's a problem with Hollywood. (and Broadway)

Okay. I live in NY, which is like a crossroads of the international community. I live outside the city, but it's still very common here. The restaurant is owned by Iranians, the preacher is from the Phillipines, the one in the next town is from Nigeria, the thrift shop is run by a woman from Montenegro of the former Yugoslavia.

If you live in NY or LA the world is even more like this. There's no excuse for Hollywood to portray misrepresentations.

But this isn't the case if you live in Sioux Falls, or Chongqing, or Quetta. For most of the world, their neighbors are pretty much like them. They come from the same cultural background, speak the same language and belong to the same sect of the same religion.

So, if someone lives in an all muslim country where everyone is a muslim, speaks arabic or pashtun, as do the people of the next country over and someone tells them that americans are evil, who are they to say it isn't true? All they see are predator drones.

Hollywood portrays a reality it knows to be false knowing full well that the audience does not know it and expects you to take it as reality. This isn't just true of cultures and history, it's true of relationships between people. "Oh, men really act that way once you're married?" No, silly, it's a story. They just made it up. And so much more. This is why the conservatives whine about the "liberal agenda" and my only argument with them on this is "stop whining and start filming."

Cultural stereotypes are sometimes malicious, but generally the result of pure laziness. This is especially hard to forgive in the case of the Spanish in Stranger Tides. Both of the films female leads who are playing normal pirate* culture character are actual Spaniards from actual Spain. It's not like the production crew would need to search far and wide for some sort of cultural consultant.

* I suppose you could say "English" or whatever the culture of Jack Sparrow's pirate world is supposed to be, which is about as vague as its time (this part is completely forgivable because it's fantasy)

The simple rule is make sure that your characters are characters first, and cultures second. If your characters are normal people, have actual personal motives, and relate to other characters in a personal manner, have specific relations with other people that are based on their personal likes and dislikes. (Like the actual brits are stereotyped, but not heavily: Norrington has not only a different attitude towards Elizabeth than to Jack, he also has a different attitude toward Will. He's completely dismissive of Jack as some sort of degenerate miscreant, which Jack would undoubtedly take as a complement, and Elizabeth is not just his love interest, but also upper class, and so he defers to her. Will, otoh, is lower class, but he's a hard working member of British Society, and so Norrington treats him with respect. This isn't stereotypical of him, it's derived from Norrington's own character, what he likes and dislikes in people, and, as is often the case, in himself.)

There's not a real excuse for not defining you Spanish characters with the same detail, or your Chinese, or for that matter your Yakuza Ninjas. If they're people first, then they will be more interesting, and the story will be more interesting because of it.

What I see in PotC4, which I quite enjoyed for the popcorn factor, and some of the better points, is that "the Spanish" come into the film and behave like a 2011 textbook behavior of "the Spanish" and not actual characters with actual motivations.

Once you have actually made characters, then go over them and say "what about makin

BYTEMITE

Sunday, June 5, 2011 4:54 PM

Ah. Okay, that's fair. I did notice a little bit of poorly substantiated Spanish Inquisition-like motives in the Spaniards. Like when they showed up at the end, we weren't really given background prior to then of why they wanted the fountain of youth, so what happened next was a surprise. Speaking story-wise, you probably don't want to surprise the audience with an unexpected motivation from one of the major factions so late in the game. If only just because their arrival would increase the dramatic tension of the climactic scene.

And think I can see how the Chinese in PotC3 could be taken as stereotypical too. It's kind of strange to see Chow Yun Fat in a strictly villainous role, especially one that goes an "I Have You Now My Pretty" direction.

There is something I can cheer about Jack's completely unattached nature. The movie skirted almost too close to giving Jack that liability. But I suppose it at least skirted, instead of actually going in so OOC a direction.

DREAMTROVE

Monday, June 6, 2011 12:54 PM

It had been a while for CYF and everyone wants to be a pirate, they don't examine too closely,

As for Jack, the only bothersome thing is that he doesn't act like a man on a desert island with Penelope Cruz, which is somewhat out of character given that he *does* act like a man trapped alone on the same desert island with Keira Knightley.

The inconsistency here is problematic. It first dismisses the idea that Jack is gay, but also does not give us anything in Angelica's character that isn't in Elizabeth's (she's a backstabbing pirate who has a good relationship with her father, what's not to like?) And, okay, Kiera Knightley as ingenue pirate is adorable, but it's not like Jack's "history" with Angelica is a liability. I actually have expected that scene to end in "Oh look, a bottle of run that didn't get burned." followed by end of film.

BYTEMITE

Monday, June 6, 2011 5:11 PM

I kinda thought the inconsistency was the point, coupled with some Fridge Brilliance.

The last time some chick with ulterior motives faked getting close to Jack, he was fed to the Kraken.

Check list. Chick? Yep. Trying to get close? Despite her previous threats of bodily harm and then desperate groveling, yeah. Ulterior motive? I think that wanting to kill him for killing her father might be a big yes.

So I see it as less so much inconsistency, and more character development. Why put up with a beautiful but selfish harpy woman who has tried to physically damage you in the past, when you can go to Tortuga and pay for it? Jack, I salute you.