POTC: On Stranger Tides

[Dunk!]

Went last night with high hopes having avoided any reviews.

What can i say? Watchable, but dull. Similar to the other sequels in being long, drawn-out with no real oomph! pushing the story on.

A visual feast as expected, but imagine being served up a huge, juicy, over-staked New York deli style sandwich, only to bite into it and discover it tastes of slightly stale white bread throughout, though you're now commited to slaving your way through it.

That said, if you were already planning on seeing it this weekend, do. It will pass the time.

Dunk! Yar!

[bluemeanie]

Not sure now!

Really liked the first movie. Would have walked out of the 2nd had I not been with the wife who wanted to watch it all. Third when I eventually saw it was ok but just ok.

Saw the trailer for this new one though and thought it looked really cool. But you didnt like it and I spoke to Alec Worley last night who tore it a new one. 
Know the wife is gonna go on a girlie cinema trip, might wait and see what she says

[the shutdown man]

I wasn't expecting much after all the reviews, so I was pleasantly surprised. It's not brilliant, but it's a decent couple of hours. There are a few great scenes, the mermaids in particular. On the other hand, the direction feels a bit meh compared to the others (Granted, I think I'm one of the few who liked all three, for all their flaws).

Still, I enjoyed it.

[TordelBack]

Going on Monday for our wedding anniversary.  I'd say sitting through two hours of a slurred Johnny Depp guarantees me some quality action so I 'm not worried.

[radiator]

Only ever watched the first one, and fell asleep both times I tried to watch it - just don't see the appeal of this series!

I'd love to see a modern, big budget, swash-buckling pirate movie, but PoTC is not it - they just seem so boring. Depp is always likable, but as far as I can see he's the only thing that these films have going for them!

Can't quite believe people are still going to see this, knowing it will be mediocre and in the knowliedge that the first film was overrated and the two sequels stank, by all accounts. I'd urge everyone to go and see Attack the Block instead.

[Dunk!]

tore it a new one. 

See now a review like that would mean a passion and an involvement with the franchise that the other sequels knocked out of me.

For me it's too bland to actively dislike. It's the kind of film that when it turns up on the beeb on some future xmas day I will find something else to do, so as not to waste more of my time.

[TordelBack]

I'd urge everyone to go and see Attack the Block instead.

I would, but Nick Frost is less likely to get me laid.  Priorities, man, priorities! 

[radiator]

My brother in law was banging on about getting tickets for this the other day - but the thing is, if you asked him and my sister what they thought of the last two, they would almost certainly shrug and say "They were alright". Doubtless they will have exactly the same reaction when you ask them what they thought of this one. It's like they have no mind of their own when it comes to these things.

In my mind, unless a cinema trip moves me, makes me really laugh or brings a tear to the eye, or else totally bowls me over in some other way then I consider it a waste of time and money. "Alright" isn't good enough these days - I certainly wouldn't queue up for the same old tepid shit year in, year out.

[TordelBack]

Your points are a good ones, Radiator, but there is a market (me) that only get out to the cinema as a couple maybe 3-4 times a year (birthdays, anniversary and possible random day).  Being able to identify something that's visually large enough to be 'worth seeing in the cinema' rather than waiting for the DVD, far enough ahead to efficiently marshal babysitting resources, usually means picking a well-trailed blockbuster from a 'safe' franchise (see also:  Harry Potter) that both parties generally enjoy.  It's often not the movie I'd choose to see given free rein, but it's a compromise that'll suit the circumstances.

Despite the relatively low amounts of money from our 6-8 tickets a year, I suspect that this a significant part of the movie industry's business plan.

EDIT: We recently did get out to see Herzog's astounding Cave of Dreams, mainly because it coincided with my 40th birthday, and that was something to move an inspire.  The contrast was striking, but it's not going to stop me seeing PotC4 this Monday.

[radiator]

Fair enough. I'm quite lucky as generally it's me who gets to choose what films me and my girlfriend go and see as I'm more clued up about what's coming out and what will be worth our time. A lot of the time she won't really know anything about the film I do choose (as was the case with Attack the Block and Submarine), but will trust my judgement as we tend to enjoy the same sorts of films I and can usually predict what she will or won't like.

The rare occasions when she chooses the film can be a bit of a nightmare - she can be more swayed by 'star power' or hype so I've had to endure some pretty awful 'star vehicles' like Knight and Day. I remember once where she gave me a choice of seeing either The Pursuit of Happyness or the one where Renee Zellwegger plays Beatrix Potter - managed to dodge that bullet, thankfully.

For me, mediocrity is the worst thing. At least if a film is actively bad - like The Spirit (another one my girlfriend chose), you can at least laugh at it. A reaction like that is preferable to "It was alright".

[I, Cosh]

EDIT: We recently did get out to see Herzog's astounding Cave of Dreams,

God. You really love poking about in holes, don't you?

[TordelBack]

God. You really love poking about in holes, don't you?

Depends on the hole.

[Tiplodocus]

cRIMINALLY DULL.

[johnnystress]

As good as I expected. Neither great not terrible. More pointless 3D. I liked the mermaids

[Proudhuff]

wot no pedentry? this thread disapoints