Jack Sparrow on Meth?

Rating: 6/10 (31 July 2006)

After the notable success of the first movie ever made from an amusement park ride, the writers and directors were trapped. They had to make a sequel -- and probably another sequel, and another, and another. You get the idea. What to do about a plot? After all, the first movie didn't have a story to draw from, no novel, no play, nothing. So they hired some writers and concocted a tale involving lots of pirates, British soldiers, a beautiful damsel in distress, -- a piece of cake. Voila, huge success beyond their wildest dreams. We were ready to forgive the cookie cutter plot drawn from all the pirate movies since Erroll Flynn plied the trade, because, ...well the girl was soooo beautiful, and Jack Sparrow so quirky in a charming sort of way, and everybody else was so earnest, the monsters so scary, etc. We just bought it, big time! Enter the second installment. What to do now? No problem, just bring back Jack Sparrow, only make him ten, no twelve times more annoyingly quirky (I swear he was on drugs through the whole movie) and throw in lots of pirates, the same beautiful girl, and lots of British soldiers, corrupt politicians, monsters from the dead, etc. Another piece of cake.
And, judging from the box office, I guess it really is just that easy. Another huge success for a movie... based on an amusement park ride. Who needs an engaging story, or clever plot devices, or great acting? Hey we have scary monsters and lots of computer animation! I have to admit I did enjoy the ride. I just wanted more. I wanted Daniel Defoe. I got Billy Silly Bones instead.
It isn't a terrible movie. It is, in fact, the 2nd best movie based on an amusement park ride ever made. It just confirms what everybody already knows: It takes more than lots of sword fights, swashbuckling, sea monsters, cannibals, and pretty heroines in peril to make a really good pirate movie; but if you have enough computer graphics, it won't really matter -- you'll still make a ton of money.