Wait for #3; all sizzle, no steak

Rating: 4/10 (1 August 2006)

Waste of 10 bucks, waste of 2 hours, waste of capable actors. It wasn't that it was horrible, it just wasn't very good. There are some well choreographed action sequences interspersed between complete lapses in storyline. While the first movie had a good story and decent writing, this movie lacks both. There is no character development, no linear flow, apparently no direction, and my God no chemistry between Depp and Knightly. Here they have a genre with endless possibilities, and yet it just lies there as flat as the film it was printed on. I'm not saying I could do any better, but that's not my job, it's theirs. Entertain us. Sequels aren't just so you can pad your wallets. We should all demand better. Enough time wasted. Final verdict: wait for TV.