Fair but, please, let the franchise rest now

Rating: 5/10 (31 May 2007)

After the rather dismal 'Dead Man's Chest', I was worried that we'd get more of the same in this film to the point where I actually wavered on whether I should see it or not. However, thankfully, 'Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End' reclaimed some of the sparkle on the franchise that the second film lost. This film sees Will, Elizabeth and Barbossa strive to rescue Jack from the world of death itself as Cutler Beckett plots to rid the seas of all pirates.
In terms of the characters, I felt as if there wasn't enough interaction between Will, Jack and Elizabeth as each went in their own direction and the film suffered as a result since these are meant to be the main characters. It was the minor characters who had more of a presence, especially in the comedy scenes. The crew of the Pearl were fleshed out more to a degree that they were actually more interesting than the three leads. Duos Mackenzie Crook and Lee Arenberg, in the role of the Black Pearl's not-too-bright crew members, and Angus Barnett and Giles New, as representing the daft section of the British Navy as Mullrog and Murtogg, were all hilarious in scenes that were probably the best of the film. Jack Davenport's Norrington brought some sense of drama to the film and it's a shame he wasn't used more. Also, under-used was Keith Richards, who played Jack's father. It felt as if he was brought in just for the sake of 'look who's play Jack's dad' and the role seemed to serve little purpose.
The special effects were top-notch, especially when it came to the battle scenes and the Flying Dutchman crew, however, gone were the days when films could coast on dazzling CGI. Plot is what counts. This time around, there was less tedious, over-long scenes designed to amuse small children in the audience (a la 'Dead Man's Chest') but there were many things that could have been improved on. The storyline was rather clunky and choppy as it tried to build up to the final battle between the pirates and the English. It felt as if the scriptwriter just wanted to have a juicy battle but there was little thought put into how to get to that point in a logical manner. The plot wasn't helped by the fact there was no character development for the three leads, who were all reduced to bit parts, thus leaving the film struggling to link to the first two of the trilogy.
If you were disappointed with 'Dead Man's Chest', it is worth seeing this film to see all was not lost but don't expect anything of the excellence of the first film. It's good as a means of spending an afternoon but it won't bowl over many people over fourteen. And certainly, it will left me hoping this was the end and there would be no fourth film. It's time Hollywood learns that it can't just rely on special effects and actors' good looks to sell films to intelligent cinema-goers.