UncleEd wrote:What we have a problem with is half baked sequels with a half assed result to true cinema classics. The DTV are gone. These theatrical sequels are a different kettle of fish.
And yet Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End got a RottenTomatoes rating of just 45%. Dead Man's Chest got 54%. So it appears as the franchise moved on it got less critical praise (and both sequels were critically underwhelming despite how much money and screentime was thrown at them).
National Treasure 2 got 31% (although the first film was hardly overwhelming at 41% so perhaps the comparison is not fair).
Meanwhile the last Disney DTV (Cinderella 3) got a RottenTomatoes rating of 80% and (the one before that?) Brother Bear 2 got 67%. Not brilliant, but still beating the Pirates and national treasure sequels.
Do you really think ANYONE will go to see a Pirates 4 without depp? Pull your head out of youe limey ass and pay attention! The objective is to make MONEY and Depp will get the butts in the seats. He is the only reason those films were as big as they were. Not even the film makers expected that. With only Barbossa and Sparrow left of the original cast how can you make a Pirates 4 without them? Depp wants to do Peter Pan meets Jules Verne. I hope whatever they do actually works and doesn't suck.
Well, the public may go to see Depp, I don't doubt that. But I can also read (even if my head is inside my limey ass). According to several sources Disney are considering cutting back on the cast and concentrating on ONE of the supporting cast as one of their options. I agree it doesn't bode well - other "franchises" which have done that have failed - but its still one of their options. I'm sure the reports would be worded differently if Depp was a shoe in (or Disney were going to go all out to get Depp).
Brother Bear is the most unwatchable animated feature EVER! I can't watch it in one sitting and I can't say that about any other film.
Fair enough you can have an opinon. I'd like to hear why you think it is unwatchable though.
I'm not a big fan of the 2 Pirates sequels but a lot more people liked those than Cinderella 2. I think the films should have been self contained. That's why I'm open minded to a 4 since it'sbeen promised to be just that. You also realize that it will be up against the Hobbit. That's another reason why I believe it will get made.
Well, a lot of people read the Weekly World News or the National Enquirer. It doesn't make them "better" newspapers than something like the New York Times. Just like the critic's ratings on RottenTomatoes I quoted at the top, don't make a film "better" or "worse" than any other. Films are personal and people have personal reactions to them. However, I do think a lot of Pirates' success is just as much down to hype and the Disney publicity machine as down to the content of the films. Just like the "failure" of a film like The Iron Giant could be attributed to the lack of publicity from Warner Bros.
The fact that the two Pirates sequels were written as they were being filmed does not make me think Disney had "quality" in mind when they greenlighted them. Neither does the fact that they (apparently) don't even have a clue as to what will be in the fourth film, but have greenlit it (and assigned a release window already). Disney may be throwing money at the franchise (but maybe they realised they threw too much at the two sequels) but I think their commitment for quality films for the Pirates sequels was just as low (or high) as their commitment for quality films for the later DTV sequels.
I heart Disneyland 
