Pirates of the Caribbean- At World’s End
There are no doubt friends and family members of mine who will love “At World’s End”- the third installment of Disney’s instantly popular “Pirates” series (I bet a theme park ride has never generated so much green for a company)- as much as they did “The Curse of the Black Pearl” (2003’s instant classic, which netted a Best Actor Oscar nomination for Johnny Depp) and/or last summer’s “Dead Man’s Chest” (last year’s biggest smash, and a deserving Oscar winner for Best Visual Effects). And it’ll be for any amount of reasons- they could be forever entranced by Depp’s Captain Jack Sparrow; they could be eternally longing for either of “Pirates” star-crossed lovers (be it Orlando Bloom’s son-of-a-bucaneer Will Turner or Kiera Knightley’s woman of the court-turned-pirate lass Elizabeth Swan), or engaged in the whole of their love story; they could be taken by the intricacies of main screenwriters Ted Elliot and Terry Rossio’s stories of swashbuckling on an ever-grander scale; they could be revelling in the singular vision of a 21st century pirate movie as created by director Gore Verbinski (who’s helmed all three “Pirates” films) and producer Jerry Bruckheimer (still the biggest name in action movies). Or, they could just enjoy the movie as a movie, a diversion from the real world that takes them to a different place and entertains them- the type of enjoyment I had once for movies like it before I got hard-core interested in making them myself, and thinking about them on a more critical level. To each their own.
Ten years ago, I’ve no doubt I probably would have loved “At World’s End.” It does achieve what it sets out to do- tie up loose ends, leave some open to future exploration- and does it on as grand a scale as $300 million dollars can buy. Well, not quite. In more ways than one, “At World’s End” reminded me a lot of “The Matrix Revolutions,” another big finale in a series that unexpectedly struck a chord with audiences upon the release of the original film, which- for many of the people in the audience- appeared genuinely original. Be forewarned, the following paragraphs may contain much in the way of spoilers. But before I begin tearing down the film- basically explaining why it’s my least favorite of the “Pirates” films- allow me to go into what I feel the film does right.
First and foremost, the film contains wonderful sights and visuals, as each of the “Pirates” films have. In “Curse of the Black Pearl,” it was the skeleton crew of the Pearl that appeared in the moonlight, but appeared human out of it (and how this effect would play out in the rousing finale was one of 2003’s most remarkable visual triumphs). In “Dead Man’s Chest,” it was the imaginative creation of Davy Jones (in voice, the doomed soul-collector was played with compelling villainy by the great Bill Nighy) and his crew of the damned aboard the Flying Dutchman, so believably imagined by ILM and visual effects supervisor John Knoll that you’d swear they were practical makeup creations (no doubt some, particularly Stellan Skarsgard’s Bootstrap Bill, were, making the illusion even more impressive). If nothing else, “At World’s End” continues that visual imagination on a grander scale, providing amazing sights such as the Pearl sailing over a sandy hill; the cold forboding of Davy Jones’ Locker; and the continued realism of the creatures aboard the Dutchman. With each film, the filmmakers have pushed the envelope visually- and not just with the effects- as Verbinski and cinematographer Darius Wolski have pushed the visual pallette darker and darker with each film, creating a compelling look that serves the darker elements of the stories while also allowing for lighter moments. Well, at least they did in the first two films…more on that later.
Verbinski and his writers tie up their loose ends nicely in this film, closing the book on some stories for good while leaving some open-ended enough for future “Pirates” films; whether you’ll want more after this installment is up to you, however. I especially liked the way in which Will and Elizabeth’s story was resolved in a way that stays true to the nature of both character’s arcs while also allowing some audience satisfaction (the last scene between them in particular made my timbers shiver for Knightley; in fact, this whole film did that for me). They also gave their actors some serious scenes to chew on. Bloom and Knightley actually take the acting honors for how they follow their characters through to the end, completing their 3-film love story as convincingly as they started it. As Sao Fei, the Pirate Lord from Singapore, Asian cinema icon Chow Yun-Fat chows down on his scenes with a true star’s bravado that can’t be ignored; he makes a mesmerizing presence (where was this unbridled hammery in “Curse of the Golden Flower?”). In far less time, the same can be said of Keith Richards in his much-publicized appearance as Jack’s dad; the best part of the whole affair- apart from his and Depp’s natural chemistry together- is his ability to completely own the role, while the filmmakers avoid making a big broughaha about it in the film- he comes in and does his thing while moving the plot forward.
And then, there’s the music. Well, this is actually one of the film’s great assets, as well as one of its shortcomings. Klaus Badelt’s score for “Black Pearl” is one of the true musical gems of the decade- memorable and creative, hitting all of the emotional beats, and paying tribute to the swashbuckling scores of the past while putting a modern spin on the genre. For “Dead Man’s Chest,” Badelt’s “Pearl” producer Hans Zimmer took over the scoring duties, and deftly put his themes through the musical grinder while also creating two memorable themes of his own for Davy Jones and the Kraken. In “At World’s End,” Zimmer offers more of the same- literally. His music still works its magic in the background for mood to what’s happening, but except for some more-exotic instrumentations, there’s little new that’s worth mentioning here. As far as sequel scores go, it’s one of the more disappointing ones in recent years. Of course, the same can be said for the film in general…
…which leads me to tearing the film down. I mentioned “The Matrix Revolutions” before. Well, you remember the Super Brawl between Neo and Agent Smith in that film? How you saw rows of Agent Smiths along the sides and- instead of building on the 50-to-1 brawl in “Reloaded,” the multiple Smiths were just spectators to a 1 on 1 fisticuffs? We get a similar short shrift here. Cut to the film’s climax. The nine Pirate Lords have gathered on the high seas to wage war against Lord Cutler Beckett of the East India Trading Co. and his fleet, and the Flying Dutchman and Davy Jones. The promise of a massive battle at sea the likes of which we’ve never seen. And what do we get? A sea storm beckoned by the sea Goddess Calypso, with a battle between the Pearl and the Dutchman in the eye of the storm. True, this battle is large enough as it is, and seeing as though all our main characters are on those two ships anyway, I suppose the focus might be too, well, unfocused if any of the other ships entered the fray. But consider the options- a rehash (albeit on a larger scale) of the same type of seafight we’ve seen before (in not just the “Pirates” movies but also “Master and Commander” and others), or a nautical dogfight on par with the grandest of “Star Wars” and “Lord of the Rings” battles. We know they had the farm to spend financially on the film (dude, $300 million bought this?)- why not use some of it for a true epic quality? It also would benefit the story (which, we are lead to believe, is leading up to this moment), making it seem less confusing (for less confusing reasons) and make the 2 hours or so we’ve just sat through seem worthwhile. But maybe it’s just me.
“The Matrix” trilogy also seems to have inspired the story catalyst for the film’s first half, where Will, Elizabeth and company are forced to sail to Davy Jones’ Locker to rescue Jack, who was last seen being taken under on the Pearl by the Kraken. Reminiscent of Neo being trapped in a world between the Matrix and the Real World in “Revolutions,” thankfully we have more of a payoff in the way Elliot and Rossio play with their idea of a sort of living purgatory than we got there. We get scenes of Jack going off his rocker (you know, more so than usual), whether he’s talking to himself- literally- or pondering rocks that turn into crablike things that begin to move the Pearl from its’ landlocked stasis, as well as a haunting trip to the Locker for the crew, and a puzzling riddle to solve in order to get out of it. It may not make a lick of sense (much like the rest of the film), but it is one of the more enjoyable parts of the film to watch.
Of course, one could say that none of the “Pirates” films make a lick of sense, but “At World’s End” has a singular silliness to its’ story that makes the first two look like children’s stories in their simplicity. (That’s a slight exaggeration, though; this trilogy started its’ path towards screenwritten surrealism in “Dead Man’s Chest.”) What makes me say that? Think back on “At World’s End’s” storyline- all the double-crosses and partnerships, all the plot twists and revelations (please don’t make me list them all…). When you take into consideration how the plot winds up…is any of it necessary? OK, maybe Naomi Harris- the voodoo woman from “Chest”- being revealed as the sea goddess Calypso, how Jones fits in with her, and certainly leave in the Pirate Lords and all that, but all the switching sides and such? Cut it. We know who we’re rooting for and against, and we know why- don’t muddle up the works. Most of it seems more to pad the running time than anything else. Granted, after the grosses of the first two, these guys can pretty much do whatever they want without someone looking over their shoulder, but that doesn’t mean they should. It’s not a question of whether I can follow the plot- which I could (more or less), but could the filmmakers by the end?
Captain Jack’s probably the only one who could, but he’s always been a bit off his rocker to begin with. Depp’s looney pirate seemed like the one can’t miss element of this series; when a critic compared him to Looney Toons’s Road Runner, always managing to foil the Coyote, it seemed like a fitting comparison. But as it did with my initial viewing of “Dead Man’s Chest,” something about Depp’s performance felt off after “At World’s End.” A second viewing made me think otherwise for “Chest,” and maybe it would with “End” as well. But in retrospect, it isn’t so much Depp- who still clearly enjoys the character (even if, like the Road Runner, he’s become something of a one-note cartoon)- but the material. The story leaves him somewhat adrift. In “Black Pearl,” there was very much a sense of Jack against the world, with all of the characters- good and bad- antagonizing our delightfully daffy captain as he just wanted to get his ship back. In “Dead Man’s Chest,” his verbal sparring with Elizabeth (and brief scene with Davy Jones) continued the trend and, in a way, furthered the plot. But except for his brief scene with Keith Richards, that magic touch of equal parts sharp writing and brilliant performance that made us fall in love with Captain Jack seems lost, as the good captain feels more like a plot device than a flesh and blood character. Granted, Depp- as ever- is game for anything in the character, but maybe it’s that “anything goes” approach to Jack that made me feel like I’d seen more than enough with the character, and the series. There’s talk of more “Pirates” films, and more of Jack (so long as the story satisfies all parties), but for me, leaving “At World’s End” felt like getting up from the table at Thanksgiving; too much of a good thing makes you feel bloated and uncomfortable. To use another food analogy for the series as a whole- the first bite is always the juiciest. Maybe they should have just let us savor it instead of stuffing us further.
