Here’s Steven Greydanus’s review of Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest, which understands all of the things that Entertainment Weekly’s reviewer does not!
And Russ Breimeier at Christianity Today Movies gives it 3 1/2 out of 4 stars!
I am astonished, bewildered, and appalled at the wave of negative reviews coming in for this film. Entertainment Weekly: A D+??
Those who are complaining remind me of a person who orders a seven-scoop banana-split sundae with whipped cream and chocolate sprinkles and a wafer cookie, and then complaining that the movie gave them a sugar rush instead of a full daily supply of vitamins and minerals.
Jeffrey, the link to Steven’s review is wrong, FYI.
Fixed. Thanks!
Jeffrey, I just think its fantastic that you were able to find a movie reviewer that agrees with you! ;D
The deluge of negative reviews for POTC:DMC is just sick. I think that “rottentomatoes.com” is desperately trying to save “face” at this point because they basically started things off with Scharzbaum’s psychotic disquisition and needed to follow suit. (Several posts on keeptothecode.com’s boards suggest that Scharzbaum cannot possibly be unbiased because Time-Warner distributes EW and, well, Superman Returns is on the Warner Bros. label. Who knows…?) Anyway, movie reviewers have just as much pride as anyone else. If the POTC:DMC is a box-office flop (!!!banshee scream-cough-cough-hurl-sniff-gasp-THE UTTER ABSURDITY!!!!) wouldn’t you want your review to fall on the “consensus” side of the fence? Adds to one’s integrity and believability. Oh, and speaking of integrity…How about all you yellow-bellied, lily-livered, rum-swiggin’, spit-swabbin’, land-lubbin’ counterfeit critics write what you REALLY think about this film instead of casting your anchors on the port side just cuz you think that’s where the booty lies. DMC will commandeer the weekend proceeds and sink your sanctimonious, kudos-seeking arses all the way down to Davy Jones Locker. Savvy? Arrrrrrgh! You lose. Plead parley anyone?
i think your ice cream sunday analogy is pretty funny.
i like it.
–RC of strangeculture.blogspot.com
Appalled? Really?
It’s just a movie. Aren’t critics entitled to their opinions?
I think everyone is in agreement that reviews (positive or negative) will have zero effect on Pirate’s box-office numbers.
Those who are complaining remind me of a person who orders a seven-scoop banana-split sundae with whipped cream and chocolate sprinkles and a wafer cookie, and then complaining that the movie gave them a sugar rush instead of a full daily supply of vitamins and minerals.
Big hole in this. Professional critics are not consumers. I’d venture that most of them had to see Pirates for their job. What if you prefer to eat a substantive dinner but your employer forces you to eat a seven-scoop banana-split sundae with whipped cream and chocolate sprinkles and a wafer cookie? Of course you would complain.
If I were a critic that had the freedom to handpick what I reviewed and I knew Pirates wasn’t my cup of tea I would just skip it because the review is meaningless anyway.
Once again, there are much more important things to be appalled over.
I have friends who think Pirates is fantastic. If they’re entertained by it that’s great for them. I thought the first one was monotonous and too long and I fell asleep, so I would just as soon stay home and read then be caught in a crowded theater this weekend.
If I were forced to see the movie against my will I’d probably write a bad review, but since I have no obligation to go I’m content to ignore it and let other people have thier fun.
Note: In my previous post I misspelled “Schwartzbaum.” Sorry.
Yep. Evan is right…The reviews probably won’t make much difference, especially to serious POTC fans, but I don’t think the reviewers would agree as they craft these things. Surely they think they have some sway as far as movie goers are concerned. This is why they say things like, “Don’t waste your money” or “I can think of better ways to spend your weekend.” Money doesn’t grow on trees and reviewers know a lot of us have a limited supply. Therefore, if—for whatever reason—they can persuade you to spend your dollars on one thing instead of another, they’ve done their job well. Sure, they are as welcome to their own opinions as I am, only my opinion doesn’t carry as much fiscal value as theirs do. As “professionals,” reviewers give paid opinions that can impact pocketbooks in any number of ways. Also, as professionals, reviewers know that the banana-split sundae comes with the (mixed-metaphor alert) territory; it’s been ordered in advance along with their salaries. Press kits tell them what they’re in for, and as for them having no choice…the choice was made when they took the job. Hence, no one is forcing them to do anything. In my job I have to do a whole lot of things that aren’t my cup of tea and I really think I do them at least as well as the tasks I actually enjoy. However, Evan made an interesting comment: “If I were forced to see the movie against my will I’d probably write a bad review,…” I wonder if some of our “professional” reviewers felt the same way?
reviewers, critics, etc. do make a difference, believe it or not.
what sent me to see Pirates was Jeffrey’s obsession with it (which i don’t share, but i enjoyed it nonetheless), but he, unlike the movie ‘critics’ at EW, has largely earned my trust.
Entertainment Weekly couldn’t write a good, informed movie review to save its flimsy arse.
We had much the same reaction to the film, loving it but recommending very, very selectively.
A note: it’s Jackie Earle Haley, not Jackie Hale Early. 🙂
Regarding this comment:
‘Field doesn’t hesitate to draw a stark comparison between this and certain present-day global dramas—the destructive effects of fear mongering, and the way in which rash retaliation makes a bad situation worse. Are we any safer for having carried swift, drastic, poorly coordinated violence into someone else’s “yard” in the name of “homeland security”?’
I was enjoying the review (though I haven’t seen the film yet.) And then I get to this, which I cannot seem to get away from no matter where I go. It is something so widely assumed at this point that no one even questions it, and trying to correct it has proved useless time and again. It is an assumption that drives me mad.
We went into Iraq because of UN resolution after UN resolution that Hussein broke, as well as to root out terrorists who were given shelter there. What is the ‘fear mongering and rash retaliation’? The fear on our part is not without cause. It’s incredible to me how Sept. 11 has been forgotten, and the continued threats and attacks by jihadists which continue on day after day seem to be treated as though they do not exist.
If this is only a matter of your reporting what seems to be the point of view and intent of comparison that the filmmaker was making, that’s one thing. But I get the feeling that you seem to agree. (If not, then I do apologize.) But if so, I’m not even sure what can be said at this point to correct this error in thinking. As I said, it is something so widespread that it is just assumed to be true, and no amount of even looking at the facts seems to make a difference.
Jeffrey –
Excellent take on a film, that I agree was the hardest review I have had to write probably ever. My take ended up reading – in substance – very close to yours.
Who was it who said, I’d rather be poor and reviled in a pew next to you, then rich and fawned over on the reddest red carpet in the world….
(Oh, I guess I said it.)
it’s very challenging when you like a film but can’t recommend it to everyone, but you know it’s a quality film.
Thanks for the review, i enjoyed reading it.
–RC of strangeculture.blogspot.com
M. Cruz,
I understand your concern. I was “reporting,” as you put it, the perspective that the film presents.
That being said, while I certainly haven’t forgotten 9/11 (I haven’t seen either of the movies about it because the wounds are still too fresh), I *do* think that the current administration has mismanaged certain endeavors, and that while we do have good reason to be afraid, fear can be exploited for all kinds of reasons and in all kinds of ways, and it has troubled me to hear how many the painful memories of 9/11 have been mentioned as the reason to [fill in the blank].
Anyway, I didn’t write the review to make a political statement. I wrote it to describe the tone and nature of the film. I try to keep my political opinions to myself around here because they tend to quickly smash and sink the discussion of art.
Make that “how many times the” instead of “how many the…”
You’re allotted 1,500 words … and you *complain*? 🙂
“Little Children” is one of the few movies that merits a 1,500-word review. Wish I could’ve said more about it myself. But most films don’t merit more than 600-800 words. (When I write about them, that is. Not speaking to anyone else’s writing abilities here, just to be clear.)
We went into Iraq because of UN resolution after UN resolution that Hussein broke, as well as to root out terrorists who were given shelter there.
Is that the current rationalization? I thought it was because there were mobile weapons labs. Or because they were seeking weapons-grade uranium from Niger. Or because of WMDs. Or because they were involved in September 11. Or because…