Skip to main content

What a truly revolting sight.

Pirates of the Caribbean: Salazar’s Revenge
(aka Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales)
(2017)

(SPOILERS) The biggest mistake the Pirates of the Caribbean sequels have made is embracing continuity. It ought to have been just Jack Sparrow with an entirely new cast of characters each time (well, maybe keep Kevin McNally). Even On Stranger Tides had Geoffrey Rush obligatorily returning as Barbossa. Although, that picture’s biggest problem was its director; Pirates of the Caribbean: Salazar’s Revenge has a pair of solid helmers in Joachim Rønning and Espen Sandberg, which is a relief at least. But alas, the continuity is back with a vengeance. And then some. Why, there’s even an origin-of-Jack Sparrow vignette, to supply us with prerequisite, unwanted and distracting uncanny valley (or uncanny Johnny) de-aging. The movie as a whole is an agreeable time passer, by no means the dodo its critical keelhauling would suggest, albeit it isn’t even pretending to try hard to come up with something different.


Animosity towards Johnny Depp has now reached such sustained levels that any new announcement of his casting is greeted not only with disdain towards his eccentric performance shtick but also accompanying judgements regarding the allegations made by his ex and a profligate lifestyle that makes Nic Cage look frugal; it seems he has been forever sullied, so therefore ripe for rehabilitation over the next five years or so. In the meantime, he’s hopping about projects, hitching his cart to Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, Universal’s Dark Universe (as The Invisible Man, if the touted franchise gets that far) and various dark side turns in LAbyrinth and King of the Jungle; where his Thin Man remake is currently, I don’t know, although maybe playing another cheerful inebriate right now wouldn’t be the most considered of options.


I can’t say I’ve really been on board with the general acrimony towards his performances. Sure, there’s the occasional stinker (his Mad Hatter is as misjudged as his Willy Wonka), and his Fantastic Beasts cameo is mainly notable for retrospectively doing a disservice to Colin Farrell’s performance, but he still has his comic chops about him (I liked Mortdecai, for the record), and thus Jack Sparrow is still, largely, an entertaining character, all ifs allowing (if you can bear to watch a movie now with Depp without moral reservations, if you don’t find his ham insufferably old, if you don’t find the character about a decade past his sell by date).


Whether he’s robbing banks (ingeniously but badly; the elaborate set piece is both ludicrous and impressive), facing the guillotine (the revolving see-saw effect is a lovely piece of comic inventiveness), simply pratfalling over a fence, or commenting on the soppy reunion of pure hearts (“What a truly revolting sight”), Sparrow can still elicit a chuckle or even a guffaw; Depp’s timing hasn’t yet deserted him. If he brings a modicum of broad wit, however, much of the rest of the dialogue is unable to pass muster. An extended riff on the definition of horologist begins amusingly enough but is indulged a couple of times too many, while a rescue scene between Henry Turner (Brenton Thwaites) and Carina Smyth (Kaya Scodelario), on the topic of where he has put his hands, is so bereft, it’s painful to watch.


Yes, the obligatory young nominal leads. On Stranger Tides should have been a warning that it isn’t just the plankish originals who can come a cropper with starchy, one-dimensional romantic leads, as Sam Claflin and Astrid Bergès-Frisbey, talented both, were stranded high and dry, entirely unmemorable. Here, there isn’t even that luck. The jury’s out on Scodelario (she’s fine in The Maze Runners, forgettable here) but Thwaites proves yet again how entirely eagerly irksome he is (see also the main downside to the otherwise surprisingly enjoyable Gods of Egypt). 


I guess, to give him his due, he acts Bloom of the screen in their scene together, but so does Lewis McGowan playing Henry’s 12-year-old self, so that isn’t exactly a meaningful gauge. Poor Orlando, reduced to revisiting roles he only won in the first place because he was pretty; now he’s too old to be a pin-up (a shocking 40), he’s left with nothing to fall back on.


That the need was felt to return to this well is the most aggravating aspect of Salazar’s Revenge, even if Will Turner is more peripheral than I feared. And, as these things go, it was at least appropriate to bring back Keira for closure’s sake (she still looks very young, of course, because she still is very young), although her bank balance was probably the deciding factor. And yet, it isn’t closure, is it? Despite being heralded as “the final adventure” (not betting on its success, more like, given Depp’s falling star), the post-credits scene sets up a sixth instalment… with Will and Elizabeth back again, properly this time, Gawd help us. It indicates, if indication were needed, that Disney has no idea what makes the franchise tick, and the mistakes haven’t only been down to regular screenwriters Ted Elliot and Terry Rossio.


Because Jeff Nathson’s screenplay is frequently doing its best to give you franchise fatigue. This is the first entry without Elliott and Rossio providing the goods (Rossio is co-credited with story), and the at-best oddball edge they brought to their work (Small Soldiers, the first couple of Pirates, Shrek, The Lone Ranger) is largely absent. Nathanson has a clutch of underwhelming sequel credits to his name (including Speed 2, Rush Hours 2 and 3 and Kingdom of the Crystal Skull) and one senses the last thing you go to him for is innovation or inspiration. Thus, the movie’s MacGuffin manages to be both moribund and all sorts of horrible in terms of coherent properties and the logic of its location.


The Trident of Poseidon break all sea curses, we are told, so can aid Henry (continuity) in releasing his father (continuity) and Barbossa’s daughter (continuity) in just being plain inquisitive, and Javier Bardem’s Salzar in getting revenge on Sparrow (continuity, of a less severe order, until we get a flashback telling us how Jack got his last name). Also in the mix, the connection of Jack’s compass to the efficacy of curse of the Devil’s Triangle isn’t established in a way that makes any sense. Further, Barbossa must surely know where the Trident is, if he’s the one who produced the diary he gave to his daughter who uses it to navigate to the island of its location? 


There’s additional, all-encompassing, unnecessary father-daughter continuity right there, quite beside having made Barbossa steadily more ineffectual with each successive instalment; he’s gone from the villain to the compassionate, caring pater (about the one sensible move made here is killing him off; no reflection on Rush’s spirited performance, but including the character each time is unnecessary baggage that bogs down storytelling opportunities). Come to that, Davy Jones’ return (continuity) oughtn’t to be possible, given he was also victim of a now-broken curse (I’m sure it will be written to work, if box office receipts warrant the final final adventure).


With these movies, there’s an opportunity to mix things up as much as you want, as long as Jack Sparrow stays the same. Instead, everything remains the same, with interchangeable piratical or admiralty villains. Bardem fits both, pretty much (albeit Spanish navy, rather than admiralty) and aside from strangely swishing undersea locks in open air, he’s easily the least distinctive of the Sparrow’s nemeses. About the only point of note I can summon is how unreservedly bloodthirsty he is, despatching Barbossa’s crew at any opportunity, which at least creates a sense of stakes. David Wenham is an even less important side antagonist as Naval Lieutenant Scarfield, suitably dislikeable, but not inexcusably so since this is mostly directed at Henry, and exiting the proceedings in an unsurprisingly offhand, “did you notice?” manner.


Salazar’s Revenge is overlong, despite being the shortest in the series, but at least its all-out CGI climax is one of the better ones (who can forget the interminable finale of At World’s End?) There’s some vibrant visualisation (the ship sailing along the edge of a wall of water) and a sense of grounded escalation, despite the pixels flying about. In general, though, this is very much in keeping with the tone of its predecessors, too much so to stand on its own two feet. That’s unsurprising, as even the US title is virtually indistinguishable from the second instalment’s (I’m guessing that was why Salazar’s Revenge was plumped for elsewhere, despite the resultant glaring title miscue of Salazar’s saying “Dead Men Tell No Tales” only for the title card to be entirely different).


Rønning and Sanberg are more than capable of putting together a decent action/chase sequence and weaving humour into the mix, such as the decomposing shark attack/Salazar chase; it’s mainly in the adjunct characters that weariness sets in. Particularly so when bright spots aren’t made the most of, or when it’s recognised that less is more. After expecting the worst, Beckham’s cameo in King Arthur: Legend of the Sword wasn’t nearly as woeful as suggested; the same can be said of Paul McCartney’s here. It’s certainly better than Keith Richards’ in At World’s End (he gets a laugh, for a start, telling a joke with no punchline). In contrast, there’s much, much too little of Golshifteh Farahani’s bewitching witch Shansa, and one can only hope, if they do a sixth, that she’ll be on board (although, that would entail more continuity). Stephen Graham is also good value as crewman Scrum, and certainly garlands the most excruciating moment, as his crewmates attempt to extract one of his toenails to pick a lock.


It’s probably fair to say, four sequels in, that very few who didn’t like the previous outing(s) are going to be checking Pirates of the Caribbean: Salazar’s Revenge out, and on that level, like the Transformers series (entries of which I have seen at the cinema: zero), it’s critic-proof by this point. Like that franchise, Pirates’ US box office performance has diminished as international takings have offered compensation, which is unlikely to be as substantial this time out. I’m not all that keen on a sixth bringing Will, Elizabeth and Davy Jones (and the blessed Thwaites to boot) back, but on the other hand, Jack Sparrow; these movies have become akin to the Marx Brothers’ stint with MGM, where you fast-forward through the romance and songs to get to the comic business; while that side still delivers, I’m still game.


Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Poor Easy Breezy.

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (2019)
(SPOILERS) My initial reaction to Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood was mild disbelief that Tarantino managed to hoodwink studios into coming begging to make it, so wilfully perverse is it in disregarding any standard expectations of narrative or plotting. Then I remembered that studios, or studios that aren’t Disney, are desperate for product, and more especially, product that might guarantee them a hit. Quentin’s latest appears to be that, but whether it’s a sufficient one to justify the expense of his absurd vanity project remains to be seen.

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

Would you like Smiley Sauce with that?

American Beauty (1999)
(SPOILERS) As is often the case with the Best Picture Oscar, a backlash against a deemed undeserved reward has grown steadily in the years since American Beauty’s win. The film is now often identified as symptomatic of a strain of cinematic indulgence focussing on the affluent middle classes’ first world problems. Worse, it showcases a problematic protagonist with a Lolita-fixation towards his daughter’s best friend (imagine its chances of getting made, let alone getting near the podium in the #MeToo era). Some have even suggested it “mercifully” represents a world that no longer exists (as a pre-9/11 movie), as if such hyperbole has any bearing other than as gormless clickbait; you’d have to believe its world of carefully manicured caricatures existed in the first place to swallow such a notion. American Beauty must own up to some of these charges, but they don’t prevent it from retaining a flawed allure. It’s a satirical take on Americana that, if it pulls its p…

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

You're waterboarding me.

The Upside (2017)
(SPOILERS) The list of US remakes of foreign-language films really ought to be considered a hiding to nothing, given the ratio of flops to unqualified successes. There’s always that chance, though, of a proven property (elsewhere) hitting the jackpot, and every exec hopes, in the case of French originals, for another The Birdcage, Three Men and a Baby, True Lies or Down and Out in Beverly Hills. Even a Nine Months, Sommersby or Unfaithful will do. Rather than EdTV. Or Sorcerer. Or Eye of the Beholder. Or Brick Mansions. Or Chloe. Or Intersection (Richard Gere is clearly a Francophile). Or Just Visiting. Or The Man with One Red Shoe. Or Mixed Nuts. Or Original Sin. Or Oscar. Or Point of No Return. Or Quick Change. Or Return to Paradise. Or Under Suspicion. Or Wicker Park. Or Father’s Day.

What about the meaningless line of indifference?

The Lion King (2019)
(SPOILERS) And so the Disney “live-action” remake train thunders on regardless (I wonder how long the live-action claim would last if there was a slim hope of a Best Animated Feature Oscar nod?) I know I keep repeating myself, but the early ‘90s Disney animation renaissance didn’t mean very much to me; I found their pictures during that period fine, but none of them blew me away as they did critics and audiences generally. As such, I have scant nostalgia to bring to bear on the prospect of a remake, which I’m sure can work both ways. Aladdin proved to be a lot of fun. Beauty and the Beast entirely tepid. The Lion King, well, it isn’t a badfilm, but it’s wearying its slavish respectfulness towards the original and so diligent in doing it justice, you’d think it was some kind of religious artefact. As a result, it is, ironically, for the most part, dramatically dead in the water.

Is CBS Corporate telling CBS News "Do not air this story"?

The Insider (1999)
(SPOILERS) The Insider was the 1999 Best Picture Oscar nominee that didn’t. Do any business, that is. Which is, more often than not, a major mark against it getting the big prize. It can happen (2009, and there was a string of them from 2014-2016), but aside from brief, self-congratulatory “we care about art first” vibes, it generally does nothing for the ceremony’s profile, or the confidence of the industry that is its bread and butter. The Insider lacked the easy accessibility of the other nominees – supernatural affairs, wafer-thin melodramas or middle-class suburbanite satires. It didn’t even brandish a truly headlines-shattering nail-biter in its conspiracy-related true story, as earlier contenders All the President’s Men and JFK could boast. But none of those black marks prevented The Insider from being the cream of the year’s crop.

I’m what you might call a champagne problem.

Fast & Furious Presents: Hobbs & Shaw (2019)
(SPOILERS) The idea of teaming the two most engaging characters from the recent Fast & Furious movies for a spin-off seems like a no-brainer for making something better than Fast & Furious at its best (somewhere around 6 & 7), but there’s a flaw to this thinking (even if the actual genesis of the movie wasn’t Dwayne Johnson swearing off being on the same set as Vin again); the key to F&F succeeding is the ensemble element, and the variety of the pick’n’mix of characters. Fast & Furious Presents: Hobbs & Shaw – I can’t help thinking the over-announced title itself stresses an intrinsic lack of confidence somewhere at Universal – duly provides too much of a good thing, ensuring none of the various talents employed are fully on top of their game.

I don’t think you will see President Pierce again.

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs (2018)
(SPOILERS) The Ballad of Buster Scruggs and other tall tales of the American frontier is the title of "the book" from which the Coen brothers' latest derives, and so announces itself as fiction up front as heavily as Fargo purported to be based on a true story. In the world of the portmanteau western – has there even been one before? – theme and content aren't really all that distinct from the more familiar horror collection, and as such, these six tales rely on sudden twists or reveals, most of them revolving around death. And inevitably with the anthology, some tall tales are stronger than other tall tales, the former dutifully taking up the slack.

... you’re being uncharacteristically non-hyper-verbal.

Movies on My Mind Week Ending 7 May 2016
The Irishman
The Irishman (formerly I Heard You Paint Houses, based on Charles Brandt’s account of mob hitman Frank Sheeran, who was chums with Jimmy Hoffa, whom he professed to have offed) has been gestating for what seems like forever. I’d been wondering about its expiry date, as the names attached throughout have been the ever-longer-in-the-tooth holy trio of De Niro, Pacino and Pesci.
Now it seems there's a tight window (we’ll know by this time next week) for financing coming together. It seems the plan is to using de-aging technology (most recently seen making Downey Jr look less than zero in Civil War) to work its regressing magic on these wise guys. I’m a bit uneasy about that, as no matter how good it is, it’s distracting. Not that I think Scorsese would go there if he didn’t think he could pull it off, but it will still be there in the viewer’s mind.
Hopefully he’ll make going back to the Mob worthwhile; I’d presume so, as if his word…