Passable; some flaws--but full of action.

Rating: 7/10 (10 July 2006)

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest is, at times, a frustrating tangle of plots, characters, side trips, and illusions. Yet, in the next instant, the action is rolling along once again, the exposition is clear, and the audience is engaged once again. It's a little disappointing, to be sure, in that it doesn't have a "proper" ending--but wasn't that the whole point? Didn't we know that both 2 and 3 were being shot simultaneously, and that, as is common with the middle portion of a trilogy (Lotr, SW, etc.) there would be a cliffhanger? The ending was not what bothered me.
The storyline was.
OK, plot thread one: Davy Jones, denied by his true love and driven to madness, makes a pact with the devil to gain immortality as, essentially, the spirit of the sea--changeable, terrifying, and cruel. He is searching for Jack Sparrow because Jack also made a pact with Davy Jones in order to be captain of the Black Pearl. So, Jack runs away, as he is apt to do, and twists others around for his own benefit.
Plot thread two: Will and Elizabeth are arrested on their wedding day on the charges of aiding and abetting Jack Sparrow. The "Evil" Lord Cutler Beckett (Played to perfect evilness by Tom Hollander) of the East India Trading Company convinces Will to search for Jack's compass in exchange for a pardon. Will leaves for Tortuga; Elizabeth, released from prison by her father, dresses as a boy and stows away on a ship. They both encounter Jack, who convinces them, separately, to look for what he wants most.
Plot thread three: (Still with me?) What does Jack want? Legend says that Davy Jones took a knife and cut out his own heart so he wouldn't feel the pain of losing his true love. He put the heart in a chest and the lock on his person. Jack wants them, Will and Elizabeth want them because Jack does, and because he'll give them the compass in exchange... And a few other people want them, too.
Now, this chunk, by itself, is enough for a movie. But, for some strange reason, the director (or maybe it was the editor) added in a completely pointless diversion, early on in the film, regarding a tribe of cannibals. It's entertaining but wholly pointless. It's 20 minutes of Depp getting to mince about like a drunk gay gerbil, which is entertaining, but pointless, especially when that time could have been used to, you know, explain the rest of the plot! Much has been said about the actors in this film. Honestly, while I enjoyed Depp's performance as much as the previous film, I found it just on this side of annoying for some scenes. The writers put in too many little Jack-talks-fast-and-uses-big-words-to-confuse-people oh-he's-really-such-a-nice-guy moments. Knightly was good as Elizabeth, and had a really good moment of conflict when, at the end, she takes matters into her own hands in an unexpected and mature way. Bloom was better than the first film, in my opinion. He can carry the film (And I'm not one of his legion of tween fans, so, take it for what you will.) and he does very well in many scenes.
Hollander, as the greedy Lord Beckett, looked like he was enjoying himself with his part, as did Stellan Skarsgard, playing Will's father with empathy, spirit, and deep, unexpected love.
All in all, a good film which needed a better editor.