Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End (2007) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
1,259 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
1/10
robbed by pirates :(
Miss_Jena2 June 2007
Warning: Spoilers
(contains spoilers... but trust me, that won't matter).

it's safe to say that Johnny Depp single-handily made the 'pirate' series a success. if not for Depp telling interviewers Keith Richards inspired his captain jack-isms, Keith Richards would certainly not have appeared in the 3rd movie. in between the excessive amount of canon balls/sword fights scenes, i couldn't wait to get home and tear this movie to shreds.

it's such an easy formula: three parts jack sparrow, eleven parts talking about jack sparrow, two parts love stories, six parts pirate ships emerging from water, five parts capturing, five parts rescuing and ten parts action/violence/sword fights. mix haphazardly against elaborate sets and computer graphics. let set for three hours until the audience rises.

the movie could be broken down into FOUR major flaws:

POOR WRITING. it seemed the writers were very aware that audiences were only going to see 'Pirates' for Jack Sparrow, so they thought... "hmmm, if people love Jack so much... they'll love THREE jacks, or FOUR jacks, or even MORE Jacks!!" so they made scenes reminiscent of Alice in Wonderland where Jack hallucinates and sees many of himself. the mood and overall appearance of these scenes drastically contrast with the mood and overall appearance of the film. for a minute i thought i was watching an Oompa Loompa scene from Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.

TOO MANY CHARACTERS: accompanying poor writing was the addition of too many characters. in a nutshell: jack's crew (which was two crews combined), the British crew, the squid's crew, and a new Asian crew all have different agendas that (of course) require the other crews to be killed. Elizabeth (Knightly) becomes captain of the Asian crew, Orlando bloom becomes captain of the squid crew and Jack bounces between every crew as he is traded and captured for deal-making. Orlando bloom's character wants to free his father, Jack wants to be immortal, Kiera Knightly's character wants to be with Orlando Bloom again, the squid wants the sea goddess, Elizabeth wants to kill the British captain for killing her father, the British crew wants jack dead and the Asian crew wants to be a part of whichever crew is getting the treasure. but is there even treasure?!! the object they're all after is a beating heart. and yes, it's as confusing as it sounds.

OLD JOKES. just like the second, all of the "comedic" moments in the third movie relied on recycled material from the first movie. the humor in 'pirates' can be attributed to six subjects: 1) the wooden eye: kudos to whoever thought to give that guy a wooden eye because you added 30 pages of plot to each film!! 2) jack, the monkey: the only character whose acting improved by the third film. he's also in a lot more of the scenes in the third movie. my boyfriend thought he was the best part. and he was right. 3) rum jokes: the first movie relied heavily on rum jokes. since the third movie didn't know what the hell it was doing, it hit up the booze too. 4) the sexual tension between jack and elizabeth. the cliché "trust me, it would have never worked between us..." lines return again. 5) jack getting slapped: yes, women love to slap jack sparrow. we got that one already, thanks. 6) sheer stupidity/slapstick humor: the other nanoseconds of anticipated (but unreceived) humor relied on the dumb antics of the fat guy and the skinny guy with the wooden eye.

CONFUSING PLOT. it felt as though the writers made this movie up as they were filming it and when they were running low on plot someone said, "i know, let's make one of the crew members turn out to be a sea goddess!!" and since there are only two female main characters (one being Kiera Knightly), the Jamaican-sounding chick landed the role of sea goddess. this made the plot entertaining for about 20 seconds when the Jamaican chick turned into the 50 ft. woman and started talking like the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man and then exploded into millions of crabs at which point i leaned over to my boyfriend and said, "haha, she had crabs!!" needless to say, i don't plan on seeing the 4th or 5th or 6th Pirates movie. but i will be curious to see if Depp stays aboard.

bottom line: if you were planning on seeing pirates, go see Waitress instead. written by: Jena Ardell
356 out of 528 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Good conclusion to the series, same problems as the 2nd
tough_guy00728 May 2007
AWE was a decent close to the trilogy (although they did leave it open for the possibility of a 4th).

Lets go down the list: 1) Holy cow. The CGI is breathtaking. The details on the sets is just as breathtaking. The filming sites were beautiful. These are a talented group of folks I tell ya. GREAT job.

2) Acting .. both good and bad. Sparrow, Barbossa, Beckett, Norrington, Jones, and Gibbs provided some very good acting and funny moments. However, they were offset by Pintel and Ragetti (they got annoying in the 2nd film and it didn't stop here. While I enjoyed the idea of Tia Dalma's character, I wasn't impressed with the performance by beautiful Miss Harris. I haven't especially liked Keira all that much in other things she has done and it was the same here. Decent actress but not overly impressive. Stellan's portrayal of Bill Turner was decent enough but a notch down from what we KNOW he can do. Now the best for last. Im a 100% hetero male and even I can say that Orlando Bloom is a VERY good looking guy. But for the love of pete, this guy is one of the most terrible actors ever and strangely, he was cast in two of the biggest, most profitable trilogies ever. He has essentially played the same character in every movie, just with different costumes. His mannerisms, his low "sexy" voice, his facial expressions .. ALLLL the same, all the time. Sooo blahhhhhhh.

3) The story was good but there was too much of it. It has been said here but I will say it again. At one point, I just stopped trying to follow along and just enjoyed it. Everyone stabbed everyone else in the back at least once. It wasn't "hard to follow" but a movie like this isn't supposed to make you think. You want that, go see .... Clue :P the whole Singapore thing was just unneeded. While it did add a new element to the film, it just seemed too forced.

4) Running time was a tad bit long but it passed fairly quickly due to the great action sequences.

All in all .. I was impressed with the movie, but it has its problems. Much like part 2.

I say go and see it. You wont be disappointed but you wont walk out thinking you just saw a masterpiece either.

Just my thoughts ...
138 out of 203 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
I wanted to like it, but...
evilgrinlord28 May 2007
It was very disappointing.

I adored the first movie to pieces. I own the DVD and regularly play it on movie nights with my friends. It's great unexpected fun, quotable, and a visual spectacle. The characters are surprisingly likable, and Depp comes roaring in like a breath of fresh air as Capt. Jack.

The problem with the third movie (as well as the second) is that it lost touch with it's roots. The first movie, while heavy with the supernatural stuff, was still pretty grounded in a fairly accurate real world. The characters were over the top, yes, but still believable, and above all, relatable. Their motives and predicaments all made a great deal of sense (i.e. Elizabeth wanting to marry Will, Barbossa wanting to be free of the curse, Jack simply wanting to get a boat so he could live his life of freedom). Unfortunately, in the new movies, the writers have lost touch with the first movie's charm. The plots are so convoluted it's difficult to decipher, much less remember, a character's desires and motives. It's much less emotionally grounded. It has also become so thick into this supernatural fantasy land that it has hardly any link to the real world at all. This would not have been a problem were the filmmakers not so intent on special effects and visual spectacles that they forgot to tell a good, solid story.

I believe this movie would have been better if the writers had kept to a more straightforward plot and toned down much of the "grand spectacle" stuff which really dominated the movies.
536 out of 873 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Clunker
waitingforgodot27 May 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I haven't hated a film in a long time. Usually, I can sit through bad or boring films with a shrug and find its hidden merits. During Pirates 3 however, I was beset with ill-feeling. I hated this movie.

Perhaps it was due to the fact that I haven't seen Pirates 2 since last year, or maybe it's just me, but this film was making no sense! Characters would change sides without any apparent reason or consequence. Chow Yun-Fat was around for about ten minutes of screen time, and did nothing. And the love angle between Keira and Orlando was nonsense. The final beach scene anyone? And Johnny doesn't even show up for at least 20 minutes! (His first scene was the best one in the film in my opinion.) And the thing is, I really enjoyed 1 and 2. Pirates 1 was great and 2 was tolerable. But for some reason, this installment triggered something in my mind that I could not let go.

And ••SPOILER•• OK they have a god. What do they come up with? Let's turn her into a giant, have her grunt in low bass tones, and then turn her into thousands of crabs... Hmmm... Right.

But... everyone's going to see this anyway. I mean, they got my $10 right?
65 out of 96 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Not bad
xander3430 May 2007
Less than a year after the previous installment of the popular pirates trilogy, Jack Sparrow and company return in Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End. The film should be great, given a three hundred million dollar budget, huge anticipation, and the closure a third installment inevitably brings to a series. While this film does show its budget and is quite visually arresting, it lacks a fair share of resolution to the trilogy and confuses with its overflowing exposition rather than purely existing to entertain.

Even in an action packed pirate movie, overly chatty sequences will simply bore audiences just because it's too hard to follow what exactly is being said. The movie really just had too many vague or unnecessary plot points that didn't affect the main plot at hand.

All the acting was perfectly fine, with Johnny Depp as Captain Jack Sparrow and Geoffrey Rush as Captain Barbosa unsurprisingly being the standouts. The introduction of Depp's character in the pirate equivalent of Hell called Davy Jones' Locker is a particular favorite, as well as the scenes at World's End, which somehow involves a giant, deep waterfall. Keith Richards' hyped cameo as Jack's father is nothing to go crazy for, he does a decent job, but his screen time lasts only about two minutes.

Director Gore Verbinski and his crew knew going into this that the reviews would be mixed and the plot would be confusing (in order to encourage repeat viewings), but honestly, at nearly three hours, the more the film confuses you the more it becomes an endurance test. Also, rather than providing a satisfying conclusion to the series, the end opens up the possibility for a fourth installment, which might not even happen. The crew put every penny of the film's budget on screen, made evident in the hour or so of its bloated climax. The film looks and feels like a true epic, shots are wide, locations are vast, costumes are extravagant, and the scope is large. However, the film needs to scale down its plot in order to let the characters we fell in love with stand out and shine, as that's what makes these films unique.
249 out of 405 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
At World's End
Joe Fixit30 May 2007
Warning: Spoilers
The more I think about this movie, the more I like it. This is strange, considering my low expectations. The first film was fun, and I was very happy to see swashbuckling returning to movies, but I never really bought into the script. I wasn't convinced that pirates were some sort of blood-bound "race", and I was powerfully confused by the distance between and physical relationships of various locations. But, still good fun. The second film just kind of made me mad; I loved the ending, but it was just one example of how much it was a standard sequel: every single quirk of the first film was referenced, every single character had to return, and it HAD to be structured - nay, plotted - like Empire Strikes Back. This included re-introducing the Han Solo-Leia love story where the female lead wants the anti-hero, just to appease all the screaming Johnny Depp fans. It begged to be liked, but aside from a great score, great effects, and some very funny moments, it just came off as trite.

And then we get At World's End, which has everything you could possibly want in a pirate fantasy film: Legendary ships riddling each other with cannon fire in a whirlpool, screaming buccaneers swinging from one ship to the next, sword-fights on crow's nests, and all that in about fifteen minutes. The rest is an admittedly convoluted story that is much more clearly plotted than the second film, while still taking breaks for letting us spend time with characters we weren't so sure about last time, but are once again fond of. Maybe it's Geoffrey Rush as Barbossa, or the overall simplicity of the plot, but it just worked, and I had a great time.

I was legitimately surprised and concerned at what the plot did with our heroes and villains, and was very satisfied with everyone's status in the end. I guess I wouldn't mind seeing another Pirates movie now, but I kind of think everything that needs to be done is in this film.

I can't wrap up without mentioning the very nice abstract stuff Verbinksi and co. did with the journey to Davey Jones' Locker. It takes guts to do really surreal stuff with a $300 million Happy Meal blockbuster, but they really did some new, interesting things with their bottomless bag of tricks.

A- Curse of the Black Pearl: B+ Dead Man's Chest: B
32 out of 45 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Despite its many flaws, the movie still left me hungry for more.
Boba_Fett113824 May 2007
The Pirates of the Caribbean-movie serials is probably one I'll never grow tired off. The characters are fun and great, always adventurous and spectacular to watch.

It's really too bad that this time they felt the need to make things even bigger, more complex and conclusive than the previous two movies. Really not needed. In my opinion the first movie "Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl" is still the best because of the reason that it's simple, fun and choices to be purely entertaining. They already went wrong with this approach during the second movie; "Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest", when they put in more new characters and different hard to follow plot lines. "Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End" goes on in the same trend as the previous movie. There are more new characters and as far as the new many plot-lines are concerned...well let me just say that after a while I just gave up trying to understand the movie and just let the movie take me away with its visuals, humor and other entertaining elements. And this movie regardless should really be able to take you away on a roller-coaster-ride of pure entertainment.

No doubt in my mind that this movie could had become the best one out of the series. It had all the potential and budget for that, now if they had only cut down about halve of the script...Most of the plot-lines seem redundant and are actually far from believable because they contradict from what happened in the first two movies. The many betrayals among characters and side-picking became really confusing after a while, till it reached a point when you just didn't knew who was fighting for what. But like I said before, after a while you just stop caring about it and simply enjoy the movie for what it brings you. It all is also the reason why the movie is now nearly 3 hours long. Now the movie is not as good and entertaining as the first but maybe just slightly better than the second one, because of the large scale of this movie.

The movie is definitely big. There is no lack of action as some people claim there is. There is just as much action as there is in the first two movies, only difference this time is that the movie is nearly 3 hours long and therefor the movie also has some more talking-sequences and slower moments in it.

The movie is also big with its musical score by Hans Zimmer and he actually succeeded in composing a new great theme for the movie. In its action moments the movie gets definitely uplifted by its musical score.

The action sequences are definitely well constructed and at times pure eye candy. So are the special effects, although I feel that the second movie was still better on that. It seems like they tried to overdo things this time and I'm mainly talking about the end battle, when it comes down to its special effects, by putting in some complex shots. No matter how good CGI is these days, you still see that it's CGI.

Most roles get extended in this movie. Marty, Tia Dalma and even Jack the monkey and Cotton's parrot. But of course the movie still remains the Jack Sparrow-show. Really one of the best characters in recent years, all thanks to Johnny Depp, who provide the movie with its biggest laughs and most hilarious absurd moments. He still plays the character as good and fresh as he did for the first time 4 years ago. You can't just ever grow tired of Jack Sparrow. I was also very pleased to see Geoffrey Rush back as Barbossa. His role was bigger which allowed Geoffrey Rush to shine even more. Bill Nighy was also as good as always as Davy Jones. Orlando Bloom's and Keira Knightley's acting also has really improved over the years. I was actually surprised to see how much of the movie Keira Knightley carries this time and how well she does this. Even in the sequences with Geoffrey Rush she does. She also gets to do more interesting in the movie when it comes done to action. In a way she has taken over the Will (Orlando Bloom) role in this movie this time and Will himself gets pushed more to the background this time compared to the first two movies, which really shouldn't bother most people, unless you're a teenage-girl of course. She handles both the action- and comical sequences really well. And even Keith Richards shows up in an already classic cameo as Jack's father. But some role also got narrowed down to my regret, such as Jonathan Pryce's and Jack Davenport's and lets not forget the Kraken.

Still, I really wouldn't mind seeing more Pirates of the Caribbean movies in the future, if needed with new actors and characters, as long as Johnny Depp stays as Jack Sparrow. The serials still have more than enough potential and haven't dried up yet.

8/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/
410 out of 694 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Nobody move! I've dropped me brain!
ozq24 May 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I adored POTC 1, was a bit disappointed in POTC 2 (mainly the ending) and found POTC 3 to be a mix of the previous two. The awesome music is still in place, it's a bit faster paced than 2 (even with sections of dialogue in place), and the majority of characters get their come-uppance. There's heaps of sword fights and more cannons than I've seen in my life. The special effects are seamless and mix with great cinematography and top notch costumes & makeup. Many characters are more fully fleshed out, which was nice to see.

However the ending is NOT pure Disney, which surprised me somewhat. Major characters die, and all is not rosy sunsets and fluffy kittens. That was a bit of a surprise, a couple of characters seemed to just disappear and there's an obvious link left open for another movie. Whether it's made or not is another thing entirely (and unlikely from what I hear).

One more point... stay until the end of the credits for an interesting extra scene.
258 out of 432 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
film industry vs. film art
ddukica1 June 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Crap!!! Terrible, terrible CRAP! I feel sorry of those who think that this is a 10-star movie. I was bored, then frustrated, and at the end angry. I can't believe that somebody is ready to spend so much money but can't make a decent script or at least cogent story. The dialogs are stupid most of the time, monologues are idiotic (exept the monologues of Sparrow with himself) - especially the cry for battle and freedom of Keira at the end of the film: I felt sick... This kind of films destroy the film as an art, as something beautiful, something that can wheedle the emotions out of you, something that you'll think about and remember for a long time. This film is a product that need's to be sold. It is consumer oriented and could be rated with 10s only in consumer oriented society.
137 out of 223 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Verbinski, why hast thou forsaken me?
Aralith27 May 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Well, after seeing Pirates II, I didn't think it was possible for III to be any worse.... I was wrong. This is quite possibly the worst film I have ever seen. I understand that some movies are made just for ridiculous, but fun, action sequences and little or no plot line, and you can definitely tell which movies those are, but this one tried to have a decent plot, and failed miserably. Yes, the action sequences were fantastic and full of some of the most ridiculous stunts imaginable, but they in no way saved the horrible attempt at a plot line. With hardly any character development, far less Jack Sparrow than there should have been, the abandonment of the love triangle, the overly-dramatic attempt for an epic, and the complete lack of trying to be at least somewhat historically correct, the writers have caused cinema to reach a new low.

The first problem with the movie is that Jack Sparrow isn't seen for half an hour. Johnny Depp is pretty much what has made the Pirates films. And when you do finally get to see him, he has been downgraded to the status of comic relief, rather than the humorous hero he has played in the past. It is because of this that you actually start to wish that you see less of him. The corny, one-line jokes that just seem to perpetually flow forth from his mouth get old very, very quickly.

The second problem is, of course, the total lack of true interaction between the characters. Most of their speech is devoted to furthering the already failing plot, and the little that is actual development of their relationships is poorly written. Though I hated the idea of the love triangle between Will, Elizabeth, and Jack introduced in Pirates II, I was sad to see them completely abandon that idea, acting almost as though it had never happened.

The main problem that I had with the plot for this film is that it never really settled down. It was either moving forward far too fast for most of the audience to keep up with, or so dead still that half the audience was falling asleep (though the latter was far rarer). Plus the introduction of so many different plot devices and magic just made the story seem so implausible. I mean, I am a firm believer in the willing suspension of disbelief in small doses (such as the amount of disbelief I had to suspend in the first film), but if I was going to actually enjoy this movie, I would have had to have suspended it for almost the entire length of the film, and that's hard to do for near three hours.

And finally, the first film, as far as I know, was pretty much on par in terms of historical accuracy and pirate mythology. That is, it was very true to the era it was based in, and didn't have to add in all sorts of fantastical, magical things to give the film a sense of adventure. The only magic involved was the curse of the medallions. Which, while it may have dominated most of the plot, was rooted in some history and was presented in a plausible way. For that, I can suspend my disbelief. But when they start giving physical manifestations to Davy Jones (granted that was introduced in the second film, but still) and start calling Greek sea-nymphs (Calypso) Pirate goddesses; I'm sorry but I just can't do that. Not to mention them trying to claim that the pirates, as treacherous and murderous as they were, were actually all united under one flag is just ridiculous. No historical value (and very weak story value) whatsoever.

All in all, this film surpassed how terrible I expected it to be so horribly that I am honestly considering walking back to the theater and asking for compensation for the three wasted hours of my life.
46 out of 70 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
"Pirates" Destroys Part of Afterlife and All my Hopes and Dreams
invaderzim3025 May 2007
Warning: Spoilers
OK. So the first one was a great movie. second one was alright. So i went to the midnight showing of Pirates and accidentally fell asleep during the hour and a half of pointless content that is the first part of the movie. I went and saw it again and watched every minute and let me say, it was so bad and the plot line so choppy that once the movie was over i was unsure of the definitions of reality. Quite literally, i could have made a better movie with no camera. Jack Sparrow went insane, Elizabeth Swan learned to fight with the best of them, and suddenly the kraken, which was the basis of the second movie, got killed and ridden off in one line of dialogue. The writers of this movie should quit. and i don't mean just writing. i mean living. how do you screw up this movie? all you have to do is write a story about going to rescue jack without the driving over waterfalls, turning into crabs, or creating another movie's worth of plot about pieces of eight, which in the end got put in a bowl and burnt which made smoke that could have been drawn better with a dull rock. by the way, when you put magic into a movie, i don't want it explained. at all. just say what happened and ill catch up. because i know how people can be brought to life *cough cough* Barbosa *cough cough*. This movie SUCKED.
110 out of 181 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
part 1 and 2 were great, part 3 is a big disappointment
ikhebadsl13 June 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I really don't understand what happened here. I absolutely loved part 1 and 2, but this time things went very wrong. A couple of things I want of my chest: - As mentioned before by other people, the movie has too many (sub)plots, making it hard to follow as you are constantly thinking about what the last scene meant.

  • The whole calypso character is a joke. In part one, The Black Pearl was 'da bomb'. In part two it was the flying Dutchman and the Kraken. Now in part three they needed something that could top that all and they come up with some fake God which does nothing in the end, except make the weather bad. How cool is that? (Not) - All the action in the film is stuffed together, making the biggest part of the film very boring and the 'exiting' part is over the top. I like action a lot, but this was just too much. Especially with the rest of the movie having only a few small action moment.


  • I swear that if Lord of the rings hadn't happened, we wouldn't have seen such a stupid armada of battleships at the end. How unrealistic.


  • Especially for a Disney film: How lame to let Will die. Everybody would like to see that couple (Will and Elizabeth) together! For God's sake, Capt Jack even wanted to be the next captain of the flying Dutchman, why not let him? Everybody happy! - The worst thing is that because this movie disappoints me a lot, part two has become useless as well! That film (part 2) ends abruptly so we are forces to watch or even buy part three, or else two is unfinished.


You probably will watch this movie anyway (I can't blame you, I made the same mistake) but if you don't need to, at least don't watch it at the movies. Just rent it some day. They don't deserve the money.

Thanx for reading!
22 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Confused?
eched5 September 2007
Warning: Spoilers
In order to try and turn Pirates into the greatest/biggest epic of all time the makers of this film have all decided to give it the most epic plot of all time. To bad the plot is to massive for its own good.

Believe it or not, but it would take me at least twenty pages to summarize the plot. Yes, it has that much to it. I'm not even going to bother to try and explain it. Short to say, there is a new plot point about once every ten minutes, and sometimes three or four all at the same time. This makes the film next to impossible to fallow. By the end I was so lost I just didn't care anymore.

Also, many plot points were simply added to add spice and were not thought threw. There is a massive goddess subplot that ends up going no where and when they at last bring forth the goddess she does nothing more then explode into crabs and doesn't really help anyone out at all, making the whole plot line unneeded. It simply had no pay off.

Also, since a lot of the story lines weren't thought threw they come to moronic conclusions. The ending with Will is so dumb I don't even know where to start. Plus, there's the ending to the love story which has Will and Elizabeth getting married in mid battle. The scene is so corny I can't even put it into words. It felt like a school play with a big budget at that point.

Lastly, there are no more heroes in the series. Everyone is now stabbing each other in the backs to get what they want and they all secretly want to kill each other. Will, who in the first film was a noble man trying to save the love of his life, has now become a heartless backstabber who only wishes to save Jack just so he can kill him and get his ship. Elizabeth is also heartless and betrays all she meets. These are not the heroes you came to care for at the start of the series. They're all just greedy brats in things for their own gain. Will use to be a likable guy. Now he just comes off as, well, mean.

Other then that there is not much to say. The film simply is a confusing end to what could have been a great series. Sad really.
20 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Give this movie a chance!
aniterz29 May 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I liked POTC: At World's End very much. Let me explain to you why:

I liked the scenario. The first time I saw the movie it didn't seem right, and I felt that it was made up to cover plot holes. I though that Will taking Davy Jones's place on the ship was just a petty excuse for a plot twist, and most of the stuff that happened seemed pointless. But I went to see it again, just to give it a second chance. In the end it seemed to me that the scenario was logical. You can finally understand why Tia Dalma brought Barbossa back to life and helped him find Jack. It was all because of the fact that she wanted to come out of her human bonds. Also, Davy Jones's death can be explained. First of all, if he hadn't died, Will would have died instead. Secondly, if he hadn't died, Tia Dalma would have probably killed him, since she was so angry with him for imprisoning her to her human body. After dying and falling in the whirlpool, it was like he was falling in the arms of Calypso, since she was what made the whirlpool. But it is a tragic irony that Davy Jones did not know that Tia Dalma was mad at him. So, after Jack gave his sword to Will to stub the heart, Will should take his place on the ship. So Elizabeth stayed with Will, or at least with nobody other in her heart but Will.

I believe all the above was a smart way to end every love story. Everyone was finally where he or she would be happier, sort of.

But the true ending of the story was really the last scene. The scene where Jack is on the port of Tortuga, once again marooned by his crew and Barbossa. Gibbs is not among those that betrayed him, just like it happened in the first movie. Also, Barbossa is after some treasure that gives eternal life, but Jack knows the only way to help him find it, since he stole the map. Just like it happened in the first movie, when only Jack knew that it was William's blood they needed, not Elizabeth's. Jack and Gibbs repeated that line they said at the first movie ("Take what you can… Give nothing back"). Also, I think that the way the movie ended (with Jack humming the song he was humming at the end of the first movie) was a great way the writers came up with to tell you "Know what? This is not the end. It is the end of the on-screen trilogy, but not the end of the lives of the characters. It's just another beginning".

And, one last element that made this movie the best way to end the trilogy is the filling that it gives you. It's the feeling that Captain Jack is always going to run after his precious Pearl, never quite being the captain for a long time.

But, come on! You can't expect this movie to be like the first POTC movie, especially since Pirates 2 seemed to be selling more Hollywood than pirates. If you don't want to like it, it's your right to do so. I am just suggesting that you give the movie a chance to impress you. I did give it a chance and you know what? I loved it. Sorry if I made you have a headache with all that I said about Pirates. I just think that it is a misunderstood movie.
32 out of 48 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Not a big fan of other 2, but loved this one
mommymandn29 May 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I have to admit that I was just along for the ride when accompanying my husband and daughter to the movie. I'd seen the other two, and, while I thought they were entertaining but wasn't a huge fan.

I'd planned to be entertained by this one, but wasn't expecting to be overly fond of it. I was VERY wrong.

I absolutely loved it, in fact, I convinced my family to join me again in seeing it again two days later. I will admit that you have to follow carefully to make sure that you understand who is making a deal with who to double cross someone else (yep, that's a bit confusing, but it is a bit of the part of the fun of the movie).

I won't say that it is the easiest movie to follow that I've ever seen, but it was a great deal of fun overall. In my son's words, the sword fight scenes were incredible.

**Major Spoiler** I've read some comments saying that they didn't like the Will/Elizabeth scene in the midst of the battle. However, I have to say that their unusual wedding was my favorite part.
38 out of 59 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Zzzzzzz
ColeSear28 May 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I came. I slept. I left. I wasted my time what a piece of garbage. The thing doesn't move at all, it lasts forever, scenes are overly drawn out and several of them are redundant. It took the film about an hour to establish some sort of premise otherwise it was just wasting its time with eye candy and gimmicks. The acting, including Johnny Depp who was great in the first film, was all flat and boring. The grotesque sea creates Davey Jones and his minions lost whatever appeal they had the feeling of repulsion separated from all other emotion isn't effective. The Black Pearl had at least some legs to stand on, however, wobbly. This series followed (or follows I shudder at the thought) a progression of getting progressively worse and longer. The first was good but too long by a half an hour, the second bad and too long by 45 minutes this one was god awful and shouldn't have started in the first place. Orlando Bloom's character doesn't really die which is a joke and I didn't care about anything that happened in it for a second. And the ending, or should I say endings, may be in fact worse than The Return of the King because at least those multiple endings were preceded by a great film. This one was barely watchable. I liked the first Pirates of the Caribbean a lot and felt, due in part by running time, that I wanted to see the story resolve itself though I really could care less. Now I wish I hadn't.
42 out of 66 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Fitting Finale
reyman1220 May 2007
Just finished viewing a private screening of the final chapter of the Pirates of the Caribbean and can confirm it does not disappoint.

The original is still the best but 'At World's End' completes the trilogy on a high note.

Johnny Depp continues to shine as Captain Jack and Chow Yun Fat makes a huge impact as Captain Sao Feng. Academy Award winner Geoffrey Rush returns as Barbossa and his exclusion from most of the 2nd movie was the reason it was my least favorite out of the whole trilogy. Keira Knightly and Orlando Bloom complete the All-star class and do an OK job as their respective characters.

The whole film build up to the final battle which is one of the finest since the Lord of the Rings.

If your a Pirates of the Carribbean Fan, this one is not to be missed.

8/10
456 out of 838 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
As awesome a finale as anyone could have hoped for...
Imrak21 May 2007
If you, like me, were disappointed by the over-hyped, sloppy and disappointing returns of Shrek and Spiderman in the first two mega-threquels of the summer, then I have good news for you. One third entry in a huge cinema franchise is every bit as good as you would expect.

While lacking the surprise of the original, the third Pirates film is much better than the second (though I liked it, I thought it had too many jokes and gags; a lot of the heart in the first was missing it seemed). Its lengthier, and not in a slowed-down way. Longer meaning more action, more characters (Chow Yun Fat and Keith Richards are awesome), and a final battle so enriched with awesome design, careful choreography and stunning visual effects it will blow your mind.

The cast is great, the thrills all first-rate. I don't want to give away any of the surprises and great moments to die-hard fans like myself. Just trust me: this summer spend your buck on Pirates...it's worth it!!!!
655 out of 1,226 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
What movie did you folks see? LOL
february-song4 June 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Because I can't believe I saw the same film as all these folks rating it a 10.

I wanted to love this film. We counted down the days, as a family, till this film was released. We loved Pirates from the first Yo Ho, but this ending was the ending none of us even could have dared dream in our nightmares.

I wish I hadn't seen it. I wish I had skipped DMC and AWE until the reviews were in. I believe that the franchise took itself way too seriously in the end and forgot that it was supposed to be FUN.

Also, in reading around the 'net the explanations going on about the bonus scene and what it meant- that dialog explaining the end of the curse at 10 years got cut out, doesn't help me at all. If you go by what was said in the movie- they did the equivalent of condemning Luke Skywalker to an eternity of servitude. Not to mention killing off other characters for NO reason and the multiple Jacks? Idiotic. What was up with the opening of the film? Am I the only person who, as a parent, found it absolutely horrifying? Absolutely heartbreakingly disappointing. So many other endings would've made sense. This one made none. Now thinking about the trilogy- especially the first movie which has been my favorite movie of all time since it was released, just makes me sad.

Maybe I like happy endings, for a movie made by Disney and based on a theme park ride, I don't think that's too much to ask.
24 out of 36 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
You're kidding me, right?
capncrusty4 December 2007
It's like 150 people were told, "You can each write 1 minute of the screenplay", but no one was allowed to see what anyone else was writing; and then those little bits of script were all tossed into a blender, mixed on "high" for about a week, and finally splorked out onto the screen like a drunk sailor's vomit in stormy seas. Whoever the "continuity" person was for POTC3 should be keelhauled, drawn and quartered, hanged from a yardarm, then forced to have dinner with Gilbert Gottfried at a cheap taco joint called "The Alley Cat Tortilla".

In case it's not clear by now, what I'm saying is that THIS THING MADE NO SENSE. Is "comprehensible plot" no longer a viable concept? Has Hollywood finally come out and admitted that they'll make only one good movie, then churn out a mess (literally) of crappy sequels, knowing that their investment will make them big bucks no matter what? I hope to Poseidon that Johnny Depp is still smacking himself for ever agreeing to making this piece of trash.

And while I'm in the mood, politically incorrect as it may be, a skinny, diminutive, pouty-lipped blond won't be a convincing swashbuckler no matter HOW MUCH SHE BELLOWS!

For what it's worth, I loved the first POTC, tolerated the 2nd, and am a big pirate fan, in that I own my own swashbuckler costume, as well as a copy of "Treasure Island", have been spewing Robert Newtonish "piratese" for literally decades, and observe "Talk Like A Pirate Day" as my favorite holiday. So don't go thinking I didn't like this because I don't like pirates.
29 out of 45 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Simple AWFUL!
inthedump30 May 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Pirate's 1 = AWESOME Pirate's 2 = OK Pirate's 3 = AWFUL

I do not recommend this movie. I feel that the writers ruined the plot with too many jokes, not enough plot, and too unrealistic of things. Like Jack Sparrow...why's he have doubles and shoulder angels? A very stupid effect in my opinion. I wish I could have said that these movies come to a good conclusion but I don't even understand the whole "let's get married during a big fight." What the heck! Who would get married during a fight. It seems like this movie went way passed my range of realism. I'm not saying the graphics were bad or the acting was bad. It was the driven plot. Again, if all of the movies were like pirates 1, i would be real happy right now. But, unfortunately they aren't.
29 out of 45 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Best out of the "pirates" trilogy...I'm not disappointed!
phantom_lover_188129 May 2007
I'm a huge fan of the Piates of the Caribbean movies, but I was a little nervous about seeing this third installment because of the not as good other third installments. I still had pretty high expectations, and I was not disappointed! The plot was brilliant and very creative, with plenty of exciting twists and turns. As always, the acting was incredible. Johnny Depp always does an amazing job, but his Captain Jack Sparrow is probably one of his bests works yet! I still don't see how anyone could be so brilliant... Anyways, overall, just a really great film. Better than the other Pirate films in the trilogy (and you know how good those are!) See it, you won't be disappointed!
29 out of 45 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Deserves to walk the plank.
thebluebasil6 May 2008
Warning: Spoilers
In summary: Dreadful with a capital D. One of Hollywood's worst.

This is a long overdue review but a necessary one nevertheless. I had the misfortune of attending the gala premiere of this film in late-May 2007, and never have I been so physically uncomfortable in a cinema hall before.

True fans of the P.O.T.C. franchise will cringe at this cinematic debacle. An incoherent plot, insipid cinematography, contrived comedic timing and uninspired acting all add up to two hours of pure torture. The premise of the first two movies were gripping and compelling; and it was no surprise that At World's End enjoyed very successful opening weekend box office sales, given that people were ready for a fabulous final installment of the trilogy. At World's End, however, is the cinematic equivalent of garnishing an exquisitely made soufflé with a piece of lard.

The over-reliance and over-emphasis on Jack Sparrow's drunken stupor silliness becomes old after 17 minutes. The maelstrom-fighting scene lasted no less than 45 minutes, by which time most of the audience were actually struggling to keep the coke and popcorn down. Keira Knightley's stubborn refusal to display emotion of any sort was equally vomit inducing. I've also seen pedal-powered wheelchairs that had more relevance than Chow Yun Fatt's random bizarre appearance.

Perhaps the only redeeming factor of the movie was the fact that the set and props were admittedly intricate and very well-crafted. The CGI was top-notch as well. But if Mr Bruckheimer and Mr Verbinski sunk into the backseats of their Bentleys and thought, "Okay, the plot's rubbish, the acting is beyond awful, but hey! The CGI's great and we've got Jack Sparrow, that's enough to plaster up the festering wounds of this horror show", they were sorely mistaken.

No warm-blooded human being will walk out of this movie feeling satisfied and entertained. If you're looking to get some great swashbuckling underwater action with oodles of creepy sea creatures and brazen barnacles, I highly recommend any episode of Spongebob Squarepants.
10 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
'At World's End': How to blow several million dollars without breaking a sweat.
tim100000030 May 2007
The third movie in this series is truly a lazy effort from all involved. The story is mundane, unimaginative and basically a rehash of what we have already learned from 'Dead Man's Chest'. For a family adventure movie it is unforgivably boring, with long sections of humming & hawing punctuated only by brief action sequences that look like they've been shot by the 2nd Unit director in a couple of hours.

The humor has been reduced to catchphrases, the script forcing Johnny Depp grind a likable character into the dust until it's nothing more than tiresome. The special effects while still excellent (notably Davy Jones' tentacles) offer nothing more than what we have already seen in the first two movies, and certainly nothing with even half the imagination of the original's moonlight skeletons. In a 3 hour 'event' movie it's shocking that not a single set-piece was in anyway noteworthy, from stunted opener to fizzling finale.

Geoffrey Rush deserves an honorable mention for keeping me in my seat during what has to be one of the most contrived love scenes I've ever witnessed. His performance as Barbossa, the quintessential pirate is deserving of a far better movie. This alone will earn 'At World's End' its one star, but yet I still can't help feeling like I'm being ripped off.
19 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Quite Possibly The Worst Action Movie Ever Made
Harbinger7026 May 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I love action adventure movies. Indiana Jones, Jurassic Park, and yes, Pirates of the Caribbean. But not this movie. Not by a long shot. Whereas the first movie was fun and original, and the second one a little more cartoony but just as entertaining, this third Pirates film just nose dives, completely missing that mark each and every time.

Jack Sparrow was such a cool character in the first two pirates films. He seems so uncomfortable here. Depp almost appears bored with the part. Orlando Bloom is not a good actor. He's annoying, and I have no idea why. Furthermore, his character is a pain to watch. Whose side is he on? What is he fighting for? Why should I care? He is, at this point, the only thing making it possible for there to be an overblown cliché love triangle between Jack, Elizabeth, and Will. And folks, men and women, you're not watching Keira for her acting. She's not good at that. But looking hot in just about anything (less is more, in this case) is something she does exceedingly well. I'll watch her for that. Other performances - dull. Drawn-out. Uninteresting. But I will say this: the best overall performance in this film comes from Jack Davenport, as Norrington. He plays it with such conviction, such sincerity, than even the dumbest of lines sound decent coming from him. The storyline sounded as though it could open a unique chapter in the story when he reappeared in Pirates 2, but I believe audiences will be very disappointed in how he's handled in this film.

The plus side - good special effects. Negative side - everything else. Boring and dull performances all around (except by Davenport), a very slow and often confusing storyline that went no where without explosions or action sequences (the movie could lose forty-five minutes), and the broad sense that this film was both too rushed and too poorly conceived. Had the writers been given a couple years to really pound out a good script, the movie would have been as good as the other two. Instead, it truly stands out as being one of the worst movies I've ever seen.
117 out of 209 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed