Pirates of the Caribbean: Vierailla vesillä

It's as if someone has fixed your once-upon-a-time favorite theme park attraction for the fourth time. You’ll be entertained by old friends, at times you will be delighted by new ones, your eye will get tired of the effects, your ear will endure the moments when someone speaks and somehow you will partly laugh through it, and partly suffer through it to the end. The most significant feeling it will leave in you after you get out is that you were quite bored. PS: Half a day after watching it, all I remember is the raucous music, the perpetually drunk Depp, and Penelope’s cleavage. An elegant quarter-billion-dollar experience. (21.09.2011)

Yes, after a noticeably over-the-top second film (and I didn’t have the strength see the third film), it's a fairly brisk and honest piece of adventure. Unfortunately, it's hard to shake the impression that rather than an action movie, Marshall made a little girlish historical fetish that made teeth disappear for all the ruffles and a nice design. When a movie pushes them out in a mermaid hunt scene, it's a very sympathetic dark fairy tale. Otherwise, it's more like a hanger for pretty scenery, sympathetic actors and ultra-stupid dialogues that even Depp's clown grins won't save. The more serious the film tries to be in places, the less the whiff of an old pirate farce fits into it (especially the opening London scene is rough). When I add it all up - nice costumes, eye pleasing design, an ever-more edible Penélope, a very edible mermaid and, on the other hand, a poor script, hackneyed choreography and a bunch of useless scenes. No, the fourth Pirates of the Caribbean cannot offend, but is unfortunately also cannot excite. (16.05.2011)

This time the Pirates played the same trumps as once upon a time in part one, i.e. on the purely adventurous tone of the quest for treasure, instead of attempts at mythology or epicness. And it darn worked, even though it’s not so great. To hit the jackpot they needed someone in the director’s chair who can handle dynamic action and comedy timing and who knows how to present everything he has at his disposal. No blockbuster, but no disappointment; just perhaps the absence of chemistry (with one exception) between Depp and Penelope. (19.05.2011)

Ten minutes before the end of On Stranger Tides, I remembered that I was wearing 3D glasses and that the film was (probably) in 3D (it was an IMAX projection). And the only thing I will remember from this a month later is the mermaid scene. The rest is just fluff, exploiting the success of the franchise, the actors and Hans Zimmer’s music. I’m only giving it three stars because the film is playful and harmless. In terms of viewer experience, though, it deserves only two stars because it’s boring. How come so many makers of B-movies know how to come up with innovative and refreshing ideas, and the Hollywood elite behind this doesn’t? (20.05.2011)

Given the discreet aura of unsuccessful sequels, which unfairly burdened the second and third parts, a change on multiple fronts was probably the only solution. Gone is the escalating complexity of various intrigues or last-minute pulling of key characters out of the hat. And although I have always enjoyed this approach, I must admit that returning to the classic pirate escapade, in which Jack Sparrow mainly pulls the strings in key moments, is an idea worth all the money. Marshall's academic pedigree successfully builds upon Verbinski's legacy. (21.09.2011)