Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End

The plot twists and the chattiness of the trio of “Pirates” remind me a lot of our glorious parliament. Endless quarrels and fights, here played for the eye of the spectator, here meant seriously; on the outside they appear as irreconcilable rivals, but behind the scenes, out of the public eye, they even toast each other with "pirate rum", at one moment they are falling each other's arms, and the next they could stab each other in the back and nobody would be any wiser. The admirable precision of the production design and visual effects deserves praise, the final battle raises the overall impression a lot, but it's more than two hours long! With all that politics the creators deserve to be flogged. Or better still, they should be condemned to smell Jack Sparrow’s socks for two weeks in a row. (12/22/2007)

Almost three hours of mismanaged megalomania that has nothing to do with good entertainment. Verbinski couldn't pull off the digital ridiculousness, so he just put scenes together scenes one after the other without any invention. There is an incredible mess between the characters, the backstabbing gets boring after a while, and the amount of perspective inherent in the previous two films is sorely lacking. If it were half an hour shorter, it would be the blockbuster of the year, but this is a pompous bore that grabs your attention only with a reference to Leone and a funny cameo by Keith Richards. (11/30/2007)

You have to give it to the third Pirates movie: you can see and hear each and every dollar in it. Really loudly. Which is unusual in popcorn movies lately. Production design, effects, Zimmer’s music, the camerawork... On the technical side, almost nothing to fault. The running time certainly is over-long, there isn’t much of a screenplay and so it dwells in the “everybody plotting against everybody else" bracket. But where part two dawdled about in androgynous family entertainment going nowhere, here the Pirates have become darker and the protagonists have moved from the black and white into the gray character zone where nobody wears a halo. And that’s good, because hand in hand with it becoming more “serious", there is less humor, mainly of the infantile type. Not that it disappeared completely, but it isn’t humor at all costs like last time. And also the Jack character takes a rear seat, which is a significant improvement and does much to rehabilitate the Sparrow figure itself. The space left by him is taken up more than skillfully by Rush. And still, we get humor; “Larry" is a Monty Python caliber gag. It mainly depends what you want out of the third Pirates - if it’s some harmless way of spending time with the whole family, like the first two parts, then you will be disappointed. If it’s technically precise viewing that, despite a few little flaws (or sometimes huge ones - pointless storylines, animal escapades, multiJack etc.), is bursting with just the right pirate feel to it, then you could give this episode a go... And the neat homage to Leone and Morricone warms the heart. (05/24/2007)

One of the most anticipated films of the packed summer of 2007, in which I got a lot of Depp, a fierce Keira, the pre-proclaimed Chow Yun-Fat, and finally, after a clearly defined happy ending, we go home. Or not? Pirates turned out to be an unexpectedly unpredictable piece. Things that seemed clear and predetermined ended up a bit different, and the creators, even after getting stuck multiple times in the beginning, finally came up with an unforgettable finale. I admit, in the first half, I was disappointed, and several times I caught myself thinking that if the whole movie ended in a similar manner, I would consider the third part of the series a missed opportunity. The dialogues were occasionally strongly amusing and half-hearted, Sao Feng's behavior illogical, and everything was saved by Depp, who confirmed that he will never disappoint. But Verbinski didn't forget to direct, and moreover, he brought in semi-god Hans Zimmer to collaborate, who unleashed hell with his variation on Morricone's battle compositions, which lasted almost an hour. The final battle in the whirlwind is an incredible spectacle that takes your breath away, and all the events that frame it, Verbinski keeps under control even where other directors would easily lose their teeth (Elizabeth's speech to the pirates). And I wouldn't have believed that the ending of this trilogy would move me to tears before the screening. The Flying Dutchman still sails, and Pirates of the Caribbean won't become a trilogy that will change cinematography. But few will imitate its entertainment value. (05/30/2007)

Each subsequent continuation of a commercially successful blockbuster usually means that its creators wanted to surpass the previous film by increasing the budget, adding more bombastic action, more special, more of everything, and yet occasionally a film comes along that surpasses its predecessor. Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End is no exception to this rule. It is a case of screenwriting orgies, where the screenwriters literally went of their way to fit as many "shocking" twists, betrayals of the main characters, and lightning-fast changes in the situation into one film. As a result, the script does not work, and even though it is a comedy, at times it reeks of self-parody. But there is still the bombastic set design with plenty of successful digital tricks, relatively decent action, mutual teasing, and lots of small jokes, which allows me to give it three stars. It is a typical popcorn movie, where it is better not to think much and just perceive the visuals and movement on the screen. Overall impression: 50%. (06/09/2011)

Very chatty and unnecessarily long for sure, but those beautiful images, those breathtaking images. Jerry really knows his job. Plus, Keira perhaps has never looked more stunning in her entire career. (06/09/2007)

The downward trend in the quality of this monstrous trilogy becomes truly unbearable in the third, and hopefully last, installment. Compared to the first part, the action sequences are unnecessarily bloated and computer-generated (the only well-shot scenes are the cannon shots). In contrast to the second part, the there’s less exaggeration and over-the-top wit from the main characters, who were not always truly funny, but the viewer was generally entertained. This can hardly be said about the third part, though. Apart from a few scenes, most situations are downright ridiculous and cliché, not to mention the incredibly muddled editing and sequence of scenes. I don't think we should incredulously shake our heads wondering if the director is serious, not even in the case of Pirates of the Caribbean. And here, there are not many restraints. (12/10/2007)

I didn't mind the length of the film, but rather its momentary lack of clarity. However, I was staring with my mouth open the whole time, waiting to see what would come next, and having fun. The conclusion of the trilogy is worthy if unnecessarily long. And I wasn’t able to properly orient myself in the plot until the second time I watched it.__P.S. Orlando Bloom is a fool.__P.P.S. Because of the final bombastic three-quarters of an hour, it never ceases to annoy me that I didn't see the third Pirates in the movie theater. (06/04/2009)

The opening sequence is great, the bouncing between disparate locations is filled with a satisfying amount of jokes, the production design is eye-pleasing and Geoffrey Rush is thoroughly enjoying his poorly explained comeback. But there’s something now that feels wrong. The story goes on for a frighteningly long time towards the first (saving Jack) and second (getting out of the place from which there is no escape) goals, foreshadowing the already genuinely scary middle part, which crumbles the awkwardly paced plot between a bunch of characters acting independently and often incomprehensibly, whose scheming and subterfuge may look clever on paper but in an expensive blockbuster are as ineffectual as a guy arriving for a first date with a haircut like Adolf Hitler. And of course, the whole thing drags on like a crowd of pensioners at a Kaufland discount. Fortunately, the ending is worth the wait and the carnage at sea looks as breathtaking as the technical innovations allow, which makes the amount of unnecessary filler all the more regrettable, as it doesn’t move the film anywhere and only bluntly pushes it to achieve the attribute of GREAT by, among other things, its own bloated runtime… (03/07/2017)

161 minutes??? Am I being punished for something? Spectacular and dazzling, and this time also awfully dull and dumb. The story, if there is a story to speak of, was literally oversaturated with characters. There were so many captains only Captain America and Captain Morgan were missing but no room left for a watchable plot. The screenplay was flat and annoying. The Will and Elizabeth romance ran through the whole film, but I couldn’t care less about it. Orlando Bloom played his usual self and Keira Knightley’s performance wasn't anything special either. Her motivational speech, for instance, was enough to put you to sleep. Johnny Depp’s acting seemed like he had heard that speech at least three times. Poor. (12/15/2016)

A beautifully sentimental ending, which somewhat saved the overall impression that was too drawn out and lacking the magic of the first film. It's just too much of a blockbuster now, a money-making machine, and it shows. The actors are great, Orlando Bloom is probably the most unbearable of all his roles here, and the special effects are beautiful, but that's already kind of standard. (04/14/2015)