November 2011

S M T W T F S
  12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
272829 30   

Page Summary

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Sunday, July 9th, 2006 12:52 am
So, I just saw Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest.

JESUS HOLY BEAUTIFUL DYSFUNCTIONAL OT3 OF BLOODY PIRATES.

In honor of which, I'm reposting my colorbar.

y? ::grins::


Jack/Will/Elizabeth: 'Cause they're more like Guidelines, anyway.



<center><img src="http://pics.livejournal.com/permetaform/pic/001bbtrf" border="0"><br><a href="http://permetaform.livejournal.com/349861.html">Jack/Will/Elizabeth: 'Cause they're more like Guidelines, anyway.</a></center>

Sunday, July 9th, 2006 11:54 pm (UTC)
Woah @ meta. I didn't realize people were up in arms that it was racist; I thought it was kind of an unspoken acknowledgement that when you're talking about a Disney movie with pirates, that everyone is already a stereotype.

*will have to read and reply to it when I am less tired and blaaaagh from work*

Linzee
Friday, July 14th, 2006 09:07 pm (UTC)
Okay, see...to some extent I can see that. In my head, I've sectioned off what I see as two parts of DMC: the part for fans and the part for "those people." The cannibal island was the section for "those people" -- slapstick, physical humor, wacky hijinx, and escapes. That didn't feel cohesive to me, though I got a giggle out of it. The rest of the movie, however, was much darker and (IMHO) more cohesive and complex than the first movie. Far better plot, at any rate -- I'm extremely proud of them for having chosen to do something more complicated and twisty with the characters than simply "Elizabeth and Will try to get married, Jack interfers, WACKY HIJINX ENSUE."

I must admit, I am apalled by the people I've seen who were annoyed by what they did to Jack/Elizabeth/Will/whatever. It feels like the people I've seen wanted the characters to remain stagnant and while I'm fairly open-minded to different POVs and recognize no sequel will make anyone happy, I find it hard to respect that frame of mind. Yes, the characters have certainly been torn up and pasted back together and molded in interesting ways. And yes, part of that has changed and even destroyed ships (I don't really see Jack/Will without it being part of an OT3 anymore, for instance). But had they stayed the same as they were in the first film they'd be cardboard cut-outs. And nobody wants to watch a trilogy about cardboard cut-outs.

Apparently I need to make a post as well. *wry grin*

Linzee
Friday, July 14th, 2006 09:14 pm (UTC)
I do feel that I should clarify that the cannibal island could *probably* be tied to the rest of the plot in two ways, if you're going to analyze for coherrent motif. First of all, it was an inkling of the double-crossing and switching of loyalties that would follow in a more serious manner during other parts of the movie. Jack being chief means he has, in some way or another, sold out his crew -- someone else mentioned on LJ that this might be the group that "made [him] their chief" in the past, before CotBP, and that he beached the Pearl knowing the same thing would happen again (Though perhaps not anticipating they'd choose to "free" him from his bodily shackles). If he did this then he did it knowing they were cannibals and sacrificed at least part of his crew in the process, a decision which adumbrates his later selling out of Will and ninety-nine other souls. It also helps remind the viewers of the biggest difference between Will and Jack: Will goes back to help Jack and "won't leave without him," helps rescue the entire crew, and even tries to warn the group that ends up dying in the bone-cage-race. Jack, on the other hand, is just out for himself and expects everyone to follow suit - "save me" and all.

That said, it was still an odd little moment in what was otherwise a GLORIOUSLY dark film. It's the only part I check my watch through (other than the twelve-minute swordfight, anyway) though I admit Jack as a kabob made me happy.

Linzee
Saturday, July 15th, 2006 05:57 am (UTC)
Yes. Watching the film for the first time all I could think through the cannibal island scene was "I'm totally going to fast-forward through this whenever I watch it on DVD." Because the rest of the movie was so dark and then there's that silly and ridiculous bit of slapstick in the middle. Which isn't to say that they had to remove it entirely -- just that it was...excessively silly, I suppose? It went on for far too long and attempted to be far too goofy, like Disney was trying to atone for the future darkness that the rest of the movie would have.

Of course, that said, it was such a relatively *little* complaint in the middle of so much gloriousness. If that's the price I have to pay to get all that dark fucked-up-ness...dude, I am SO willing to take it.

Linzee
Saturday, July 15th, 2006 06:12 am (UTC)
How long did CotBP stay on top? I don't think DMC will be around *quite* that long, but I do think it will hang on for a while, especially given how *detailed* it was and how much good word-of-mouth its getting (at least that I've seen) to balance out the poor critical reviews. I know I'll see it a couple more times, at any rate.

I do think it has the potential to beat CotBP's overall haul though. :nods hopefully:

Linzee