I don't get it; what's so bad about the Pirates of the Caribbean sequels?

It's obvious that a lot of you guys don't like the Pirates sequels. I've also noticed some people I know don't like them either. They've never given me a straight answer as to why they think so, though.

So, I'm just going to ask here. What's so bad about the Pirates sequels? The characters are awesome, the action is superb, the plot isn't all that bad, the settings are neat, and the cast is great, if not perfect.

Sorry if I seem fangirl-ish over these movies; I grew up with the Pirates movies (I still am, really) and have loved them all equally, so I can get just a wee protective when someone comments,"Sucks, bro", and not give a reason.

So, OT, for those who don't like the sequels (or any of the movies in general), why don't you like them?

The 4th one was lacking. The 2nd and 3rd was pretty good.3eyedrazorback

I like the 4th one, but not as much as the previous movies. It felt drastically different from the others, and it had no ship battles.

[QUOTE="3eyedrazorback"]The 4th one was lacking. The 2nd and 3rd was pretty good.Mega-Mustaine

I like the 4th one, but not as much as the previous movies. It felt drastically different from the others, and it had no ship battles.

[QUOTE="Mega-Mustaine"]

[QUOTE="3eyedrazorback"]The 4th one was lacking. The 2nd and 3rd was pretty good.SolidSnake35

I like the 4th one, but not as much as the previous movies. It felt drastically different from the others, and it had no ship battles.

I was so happy that they ended the Elizabeth and Will story.

But then they brought in the mermaid and the clergyman...

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="Mega-Mustaine"]

I like the 4th one, but not as much as the previous movies. It felt drastically different from the others, and it had no ship battles.

Mega-Mustaine

I was so happy that they ended the Elizabeth and Will story.

But then they brought in the mermaid and the clergyman...

The only one I haven't seen is 3. The 4th one is okay. It ticks all the boxes for a Pirates movie. Depp is great. But I think the problem with these movies is that there's just too much of everything. Too many threads, characters, explosions lol. Too long. The weirdest inclusion with 4 are these really awkward Christian messages. It just seemed completely unnecessary. But I guess thats the Disney influence right? biggest_loser

You need to watch the 3rd one! :OOO The Davy Jones and Calypso story made me sad... I'm not going to spoil it for you in case you plan on seeing it.

When you said Christian messages, I instantly thought of Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade. On Stranger Tides reminded me so much of the Last Crusade...

The third one had me going "WTF..."

The second and third were pretty good, just a tad too long.Travo_basic

Obviously they aren't as good as the original, but all of them are excellent in their own right. The 3rd's pacing was a little wonky and the 4th suffered from a similar problem in my opinion, but I still loved them both.

Went so see the 3rd movie in theatres. It was arguably the most packed movie house I have ever been in. Wall to wall with people. The movie was also incredibly loud. I mean ear splitting loud.

Still fell asleep watching it in the theatre. 2nd one is bad, but not hilariously bad like the 3rd one. First one was okay, but the Jack Sparrow character felt really fresh when it came out and it made the movie.

Have not seen the fourth one.

Well the plot of the 3rd was just horrible.

I did enjoy Pirates 2 though (actually I loved it more then 1)

The new sequel not bad either, just feels a little unnecessary

[QUOTE="DJ_Lae"] Matrix is the same way. The first movie felt self contained, it didn't need sequels. Then they went and crafted the most awful pieces of cinema you could possibly imagine. Nibroc420

And here is the problem with Hollywood as of late.. It must spoon-feed the viewer everything.. What ever happened to the mystery and unanswered questions? Thats what made many movies classics in which fans are still debating certain points to this day.. Furthermore the how the matrix worked and why was already answered sufficiently in the first movie.. The other two movies just added meaingless metaphysical babble that was completely pointless that adding nothign meaningful to the series.

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"][QUOTE="DJ_Lae"] Matrix is the same way. The first movie felt self contained, it didn't need sequels. Then they went and crafted the most awful pieces of cinema you could possibly imagine. sSubZerOo

And here is the problem with Hollywood as of late.. It must spoon-feed the viewer everything.. What ever happened to the mystery and unanswered questions? Thats what made many movies classics in which fans are still debating certain points to this day.. Furthermore the how the matrix worked and why was already answered sufficiently in the first movie.. The other two movies just added meaingless metaphysical babble that was completely pointless that adding nothign meaningful to the series.

There was too much going on in the second and third one.. And quite frankly they consisted of following narratives I did not really care about.. As in no Jack Sparrow narratives.. I wish they would make a historically accurate pirate movie.. Unfortunately with amazing movies like "Master and Commander" becoming huge box office flops, I don't think I will ever see a historically accurate 1600s to 1800s navel movie coming out again through Hollywood.sSubZerOo

I love Johnny Depp as Jack Sparrow, always cracks me up.Allicrombie

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"] The matrix was originally planned to be a trilogy... You needed the whole trilogy to understand how the matrix worked, and why :?Nibroc420

And here is the problem with Hollywood as of late.. It must spoon-feed the viewer everything.. What ever happened to the mystery and unanswered questions? Thats what made many movies classics in which fans are still debating certain points to this day.. Furthermore the how the matrix worked and why was already answered sufficiently in the first movie.. The other two movies just added meaingless metaphysical babble that was completely pointless that adding nothign meaningful to the series.

I perfectly understood the metaphysical ideas the movies tried to "attempt" to go into.. They were not needed and added absolutely NOTHING to the movie.. Furthermore.. YES the movie could have ended THERE.. A story does not need to be fully fleshed out to explain everything to be great.. That is why teh second and third SUCKED and go awful ratings aroudnt he board..They were not necessary.. They did not explain things that were hardly worth explaining.. Thats what made old Starwars trilogy so good.. It left tons of mysteries and questions that were really never answered in it.. Because they did not need to be.. People have to understand in life that they rae not goign to be given the full story on everything.. And its this kind of mystery in things that leaves or interest peaked.. Those of you who paid attention? You must be a small knit group of people, the few that didn't despise the second or third.. Which were glorified CGI fests of crap that had very little to do plot progression.. If anything the whole Agent Smith and Neo that took center stage in the second and third were one of the most cliche and simplistic movie archs to use.. The movie was not difficult or hard to understand.. It was in fact simplistic after the first movie and added a bunch of meaningless action in it.

Sucks, bro :P

No not really I actually really like the Pirates movies. I still think the first is the best though. I think the main problem most people have is that the sequels have clear issues in the plot that don't make a lot of sense, and the first one really didn't have that. Personally I look past those problems because like you I love the characters, sets, action, and humor.

Itwas in fact simplistic after the first movie and added a bunch of meaningless action in it.sSubZerOo

I have a feeling thats the main reason why you hate the trilogy, so i'm going to quote this.

You know the dark knight? The whole movie was pointless action.
Batman could've used his sonar from the beginning, and had it trace the joker's location, and then no-one would've died and there'd be no two-face.

Wouldn't be much of a movie would it?

Superman is practically invincible, so there's not even a point in making him fight anything. He takes no damage, can carry planets, and moves faster than sound, What would actually beat him?

Hate to break it to you, but the point of an action movie is ACTION. (zomg no really?)

The matrix 2 and 3 expanded on a good story, and made it make more sense. Clearly you just didn't fully grasp the concepts it tried to convey.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]Itwas in fact simplistic after the first movie and added a bunch of meaningless action in it.Nibroc420

I have a feeling thats the main reason why you hate the trilogy, so i'm going to quote this.

You know the dark knight? The whole movie was pointless action.
Batman could've used his sonar from the beginning, and had it trace the joker's location, and then no-one would've died and there'd be no two-face.

Wouldn't be much of a movie would it?

Superman is practically invincible, so there's not even a point in making him fight anything. He takes no damage, can carry planets, and moves faster than sound, What would actually beat him?

Hate to break it to you, but the point of an action movie is ACTION. (zomg no really?)

The matrix 2 and 3 expanded on a good story, and made it make more sense. Clearly you just didn't fully grasp the concepts it tried to convey.

Yep they certain expanded on a good story by having crushingly NEGATIVE reviews by teh majoriyt of people out there.. They must of all not grasped it, and only your genious was able to grasp it.. But wait a minute if that was the casethen the first Matrix would not be seen as a instant Sci-fi ****c.. Yet it was.. Hmmmm .. No no it couldn't be the fact that they were horribly mediocre movies that never came close to what the first movie was.

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"]

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]Itwas in fact simplistic after the first movie and added a bunch of meaningless action in it.sSubZerOo

I have a feeling thats the main reason why you hate the trilogy, so i'm going to quote this.

You know the dark knight? The whole movie was pointless action.
Batman could've used his sonar from the beginning, and had it trace the joker's location, and then no-one would've died and there'd be no two-face.

Wouldn't be much of a movie would it?

Superman is practically invincible, so there's not even a point in making him fight anything. He takes no damage, can carry planets, and moves faster than sound, What would actually beat him?

Hate to break it to you, but the point of an action movie is ACTION. (zomg no really?)

The matrix 2 and 3 expanded on a good story, and made it make more sense. Clearly you just didn't fully grasp the concepts it tried to convey.

Yep they certain expanded on a good story by having crushingly NEGATIVE reviews by teh majoriyt of people out there.. They must of all not grasped it, and only your genious was able to grasp it.. But wait a minute if that was the casethen the first Matrix would not be seen as a instant Sci-fi ****c.. Yet it was.. Hmmmm .. No no it couldn't be the fact that they were horribly mediocre movies that never came close to what the first movie was.

I like the 1st and 4th movie. 2nd was alright. I thought the 3rd was extremely long and boring most of the time.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]Itwas in fact simplistic after the first movie and added a bunch of meaningless action in it.Nibroc420

I have a feeling thats the main reason why you hate the trilogy, so i'm going to quote this.

You know the dark knight? The whole movie was pointless action.
Batman could've used his sonar from the beginning, and had it trace the joker's location, and then no-one would've died and there'd be no two-face.

Wouldn't be much of a movie would it?

Superman is practically invincible, so there's not even a point in making him fight anything. He takes no damage, can carry planets, and moves faster than sound, What would actually beat him?

Hate to break it to you, but the point of an action movie is ACTION. (zomg no really?)

The matrix 2 and 3 expanded on a good story, and made it make more sense. Clearly you just didn't fully grasp the concepts it tried to convey.

just going to point out that Bruce didn't have his Sonar device at the begining of the movie. His house was burned down in the first and they were rebuilding basically from the ground up. That included a bunch of devices.

I won't disagree with Superman.

The Matrix however (despite me liking all the movies) did not convey it's story in a very legible way and lost most audiences because of it. Don't think for a second though that people weren't actually "getting it." Despite popular opinion you are both allowed to understand a popular movie and still end up thinking it's a stupid concept. Same thing happened with Inception. People assumed that due to a very involved and complicated plot that people didn't "get it" and thus that was the reason some people believed the movie sucked. Quite the oposite however people understood and didn't care for the concept.

During the viewing of Pirates 3, I spent more time reading about the facts and details on Wikipedia and IMDB from the laptop than looking on the TV screen.