"Pirates of The Caribbean: On Stranger Tides" Review **SPOILERS**

My Rating Scale:
* = AWFUL
** = Pretty bad
*** = Not great, but still worth seeing
**** = Memorable, really good
***** = FANTASTIC

"Pirates of The Caribbean: On Stranger Tides"
Story ***
Characters *****
Performance ****
Standing As A Sequel **
Overall Rating ***

PoTC 4 is easily the worst in the series. That's not to say I didn't enjoy it -- I did -- but in comparison with the other movies, "The Curse of The Black Pearl" especially, it pales. A lot.

Part of it was, of course, the gaping absence of William Turner and Elizabeth Swann, both of whom are much beloved characters from the original three movies. Jack Sparrow (played by Johnny Depp), the unquestioned favorite character, remained. It was nice to see a movie that focuses just on Jack... Except it didn't just focus on Jack.

The movie was billed to us as a sort of spin-off story, a movie that closes off Jack's story the same way Will's and Elizabeth's were closed off. Jack would finally get a love interest (played by Penelope Cruz), would reach the Fountain of Youth and make a decision, either to live forever or to be content with the life he was given, and then sail off into the sunset with his girlfriend beside him as epic music played us into the credits. And the series would be over. Much-loved and stretched to the breaking point, but unquestionably over.

But no. Not only does Jack not actually get the girl (he gets her, but leaves her on an island -- why? Don't ask me), he does not sail off into the sunset. The movie ends with him making plans to retrieve his ship, and we are left on a cliff-hanger, and we leave the theater knowing that there will be another sequel, and we will have to come back and watch it, because we love Jack too much not to come back.

Not only that, but the movie gives us yet another side-romance, this time between a very handsome missionary and a mermaid. I know how weird that sentence sounds. Try typing it. Philip Swift (played by Sam Claflin) is a missionary who is taken captive by Blackbeard (played by Ian McShane) during a raid on his village, rather than killed, because Blackbeard wants someone to put in a good word for him with God. So tying the "someone" to the mast is definitely a good way to make sure that the word he gives God is actually good.

One of the problems I had with this movie was that Philip's name was mentioned about twice throughout the whole film. My friends and I still think of him as "that cute missionary dude", because for the longest time we had no idea what his name was. And then there was the matter of his love story.

Why, oh, why, must movie-makers persist in creating romances for every handsome guy in their films? They seem to work by the rule "He is handsome: Therefore he must have a girlfriend and not die". Philip is badly wounded, but I didn't feel any tension. I knew he would live, because he's good-looking. And guess what? He lived.

His romance with the mermaid Syrena (played by Astrid Berges-Frisbey) is pretty sweet. He sees her, thinks she's pretty, and rather than kill her gets her captured by Blackbeard's men, and then takes care of her as they march her to the ritual grounds; they need one of her tears to successfully drink from the Fountain of Youth. Then, when she is left to die and he is wounded, he frees her and she heals him, and then they swim off into the distance to live what I assume is happily ever after. The love story itself didn't bother me -- it was the fact that the movie-makers thought it was necessary. Rather than, I don't know, give us a male character with some depth all his own that isn't defined by a girl, with some real character development that isn't driven by a girl, they gave us a male character whose story is entirely defined by a girl. Honestly, he wasn't there to pray for Blackbeard. He was there to fall in love. Other than that, his character made no impact on the actual story. He was unnecessary, had about three minutes of dialogue with the main characters, and took his shirt off. That seems to be a very popular thing to do among handsome male characters these days. At least when Jack Sparrow did it it was funny, because there were about fifty half-naked Jacks running around a ship making animal noises.

Now, I actually did like Philip as a character. Had he been given some real character development, he would have been excellent. Sam Claflin performed him very well, his faith in God was evident, and he seemed like a really great guy. Unfortunately, the only time I saw him show his great-guy-ness was when he was around Syrena, and once when he tried to stop Blackbeard from murdering somebody.

This brings us to Syrena. She was captured by the crew to use one of her tears for the Fountain of Youth, fell in love with Philip (you know how I feel about that) and... Yeah, that's pretty much it. Like Philip, she had very little character development. Mostly she stares at people. What really bugs me about this is that she really had the potential to be a great character. When we first meet her, she saves Philip from a falling, flaming log. Clearly she has good qualities. But, like Philip, she is entirely defined by her romance. She does matter to the story, as her tears are needed, but she might as well have been a prop for all the impact she makes on it.

The main story, however, does manage to hold up. Geoffrey Rush returns as Barbossa, now one-legged and uglier than ever, on a quest for revenge against Blackbeard. The latter apparently attacked and sunk his ship, tried to kill Barbossa by bringing the ship to life, wrapping a rope around Barbossa's ankle, and trying to pull him down to the bottom. Barbossa, desperate to live, severed his own leg and vowed vengeance. Jack actually ends up helping him. The best scene in the movie takes place when Jack and Barbossa are both captured by I don't remember who, and discuss their plans. It sounds boring, but it isn't.

Meanwhile, Jack has his own romance going with Penelope Cruz, Blackbeard's daughter Angelica, which unfortunately goes unfulfilled. I really wanted him to get the girl; he certainly deserved it, after having his heart broken by Elizabeth again... and again... and again... But, Jack being Jack, and Jack being unpredictable, he saves her life and then maroons her on an island. Poor Penelope. How sexist of him.

In the end, Blackbeard dies, Barbossa gets his revenge, the missionary and the mermaid swim off into the ocean, and Jack's is, once again, the only story that goes unresolved.

This could have been a fantastic movie. It had the potential. But it just didn't try. Was it awful? Absolutely not. Was it fantastic? Absolutely not. Was it memorable? Sometimes. Is it worth seeing? Yes. The scenery is beautiful, the acting is great, there are both moments of poignancy and moments of great humour, and there are times when all you can do is laugh and say, "There's the Jack we know and love". Because he's there, and we do love him, and in a year or so we'll all head back to the theater to see PoTC 5, because he deserves it, even if the side characters and/or movie-makers don't.

So, to be prepared, we shall need a goat, a man who plays the trumpet, and someone to stand off to the side and do THIS.

You know a man who owns a goat...

Good. You can play the trumpet and I shall stand off to the side and do THIS.

Savvy?

The Top 10 Movies I Like But Everyone Else Seems To Hate

10.) Avatar (No, not The Last Airbender)
This just came out a couple of years ago, and it did really well in the Box Office (I mean, really REALLY well, as in, the highest grossing film of ALL TIME) but everyone I asked about it really seemed to hate it. I don't understand that. I watched it with my family, and we all really enjoyed it. It wasn't perfect by any means -- there was that whole thing about Jake saying that "Pandora was his land" when in fact, he was an invader, too, and so just as much to blame for the destruction of Home Tree as the rest of the humans, and then there were the not-so-subtle similarities to the Pocahontas story, which they never really owned up to -- but it was well-meant and almost well-done, nonetheless, not to mention gorgeous to watch. Plus, Sam Worthington is cute.

9.) Charlie and The Chocolate Factory
I love Tim Burton. Therefore, I love anything directed by Time Burton. It just goes without  saying -- but I'm still saying it. I actually really enjoyed the recent remake of the Chocolate Factory. I of course loved the old version with Gene Wilder playing Mr Wonka, but the tones of the two movies are completely different. The Wilder version is sweeter and more light-hearted, while the Depp version is darker, stranger, and more twister -- which, if you've read the original Roald Dahl book upon which both movies are based, like I have, you'll have to agree is far more accurate. In fact, though the premise is the same with both movies, the older version is completely INaccurate, with the newer version being by-the-book in almost everything, right down to the dialogue. Roald Dahl was the Tim Burton of his era, coming out with books such as "Matilda", "The BFG", "James and The Giant Peach", "The Twits", and "Charlie and The Chocolate Factory", to name a few, the like of which had really never been read before. Dahl was NOT your cookie-cutter author, much like today's Tim Burton. In fact, Roald Dahl despised the sweet-as-sugar Wilder version that came out while he was still alive. I think I can safely say that he would like the new version much better, and, truth be told, so do I. Tim Burton directing a film based on a book by Roald Dahl? It's a perfect fit, and I hope to see it again.

8.) Pride And Prejudice (2005)
I put this one pretty low on the list because most of the girls I know, myself included, actually love this version. That's why I was so shocked to find out that in the world of Jane Austen fan-dom, this version is considered amateur at best, and downright insulting at worst. I don't see where they get this idea. On the technical side of things, the acting and writing is great, and the photography and lighting are simply stunning, while on the romantic side... Well, let's just say my heart pounds every time Mr Darcy proposes. EVERY time. Of course, in some ways I prefer the ever-popular BBC version (mostly I just prefer Colin Firth) but really all in all, this version is sweeter, smarter, kinder, prettier to look at, and more romantic -- which, after all, is the point of any Jane Austen book or film.

7.) The Black Cauldron
This is considered to be one of the worst Disney animated films of all time, if not THE worst, and I can understand why. The movie pales in comparison to most of the studio's other films, such as "101 Dalmations", "Bambi" or "The Lion King". Besides that, it scared the living snot out of every kid who watched it -- also understandable. The villain is by far Disney's creepiest, with his deep, gravelly voice and skeleton mask, both of which rival Tolkien's Nazgul on the creep-o-meter. But, surprisingly, the villain is what saves this movie for me. Yeah, he scared to to tears as a child, but now he's kinda cool, in a Voldemort-ish sort of way. Besides, with characters like a dumb-blonde, whiny-voiced princess who follows shiny objects around, a useless farmboy who fails even at keeping an eye on one single, tiny pig, and that *shudders* "Gurgy" thing, how can you not like the Skeleton King, even if it's just a little bit? At least he's exciting.

6.) Inspector Gadget
I'm just gonna say this right now: I love Matthew Broderick. I know I'm in the minority on this, but it's true. I think he's very talented, and can certainly act when given a good script to work with (for example, "Ferris Bueller's Day Off", "The Freshman", "The Lion King"). Unfortunately, this movie's script isn't really that great, and at times Broderick's performance is almost laughable. But... I don't know, maybe it's nostalgia, but I can't help but like this movie. It's fun to watch, innocent, and obviously well-intended, and despite its shortcomings it has a certain charm to it. It has an almost childish feel, like the big sappy grin a kid gets when he manages to make a grown-up laugh. It's impossible not to like, at least for me, so that's why it's claimed number 6 on my list.

5.) Mission Impossible III
This was the first film I saw of the MI series, and I seriously loved it. In fact, I was absolutely stunned when I found out that most MI fans hate this movie with a passion. I really don't know why they hate it so much. The story's great, Tom Cruise's acting is fantastic (the opening scene had me frozen, shocked, and with my mouth hanging open), and I LOVE the editing. It of course has flaws, but those are pretty much limited to the speed of the story -- I at times felt that it was moving too fast. When I eventually did watch the first two of the series, I of course loved them, but MI3 didn't change for me. Actually, although I found it wasn't as good as the first, I liked it better than MI2. It seemed to me that director JJ Abrams, as well as production team Tom Cruise and Paula Wagner, made a sincere effort to make a sequel that told a different story than, but was just as good as, its predecessors, and it shows. It was bittersweet, edgy, and fun to watch, and therefore deserving of the first top spot on my list.

4.) Beastly
This movie was, almost literally, ravaged by critics. Although it was eaten up by the teenage girl/"Twilight" fan demographic, I'm not kidding; I could not find one single review that did not tear this movie limb-from-limb. Even my thirteen-year-old sister came home saying that it was okay, but it felt kind of empty and she'd seen better. So why, you ask, is "Beastly" number four on this list? Well, 'cause... 'cause it's romantic! There, I said it. I, Lauren Elizabeth Smith, think that a chick flick, and not just any chick flick, a chick-flick intended to rake in money from Robert-Pattinson-obssessed "Twilight" fans, is romantic. That's not all, either. I thought it was well-written, well-acted, and a good take on the "Beauty and The Beast" story. Plus, Neil Patrick Harris is just adorable, regardless of... certain aspects of his character.

3.) Prince Caspian
Even though most of my friends really enjoyed it (many of my female friends, including myself, particularly enjoyed a rather grown-up William Moseley as Peter Pevensie and tall-dark-and-handsome new-comer Ben Barnes as the title character), this film was a flop with the majority of the series' fans, mainly because of drastic changes from the original storyline created by CS Lewis (for instance, the romance between Prince Caspian and Susan Pevensie). However, I love this movie. While I also adore the book, "Prince Caspian" is probably my least favorite book of the series. While never lacking in the charm possessed by all the Narnia books, the storyline by turns tended to become rather dull and confusing, and I occassionally found myself wishing I was reading other books instead. Leaving the story as it was would have ruined the movie (as proven by the gosh-awful BBC series) and the changes were necessary to successfully "cinematize" the story. Director Andrew Adamson did a wonderful job, and the changes fit seamlessly into the original storyline, amking an entertaining, engaging, interesting, and sometimes bittersweet film that truly reflects on who God is and what He expects from us.

2.) King Kong (2005)
Even though there are lots of people who think that this is the only remake truly capable of rivaling the original 1933 picture, I put this one really high on my list because it has managed to place sixth in my list of top favorite movies of all time, a position at extreme odds with the people who think that any remake is an insult to the original. I really can't say if it is -- I've never seen the old one. As a stand-alone film, though, "King Kong" rocks, even if there are a few hokey, over-the-top moments (i.e., three T-Rex-es battling to the death over on tiny human doesn't really make much sense, but it makes for a pretty epic battle sequence). I hope to see the original someday, but even when I do, I'm sure it won't change my opinion about this great remake.

And the number 1 movie I like but everyone else seems to hate is...

1.) Steven Speilberg's War of The Worlds (2005)
This movie has probably gotten the most crap out of any movie Mr Speilberg has created (excpet maybe the newest Indiana Jones movie, which, by the way, would be number 11 on this list if there was a number 11). Unlike the other films I've mentioned, I honestly can't find one single reason why it's considered as bad as it is -- actually, in my list of all-time favorite movies, it placed fourth. I've heard all the arguments against it, though, so I'm going to dispute them one at a time.
a) The aliens look stupid.
Think about it. If you ever met one of those things in realy life, how would you react? Would you say, "Hey, you look stupid"? No. You'd pee your pants.
b) The writing is bad.
No it isn't. I've seen badly written movies ("G Force"), and this is not one of them. Actually, the writing seems very natural and down-to-earth. This is stuff people actually say.
c) If the aliens had been studying us for millions of years, why didn't they realize that our bacteria would kill them?
It's like stepping on one of those poisonous Japanese fish. You know it's there, but you forget to watch out for it, you step on it, and you die. Really, I just think the aliens got cocky -- like "We have all this advanced technology, and these humans are so primitive. Surely we can handle something like bacteria."
d) Dakota Fanning's character is annoying.
Yeah, she is, but so would any kid be in that situation. Kids can get really annoying, especially when they're scared. How Rachel acts is how a real kid would act. Heck, I'm fifteen, and I'd probably scream for Mommy, too.
e) Tom Cruise is annoying.
Oh, hush. Now you're just clutching at straws. This is because he's a scientologist, isn't it? Thought so. Look, just because you don't like the guy doesn't mean he has no talent. He did wonderfully in this movie. So there.