Captain Phillips (***1/2)

IMDb link

viewed 12/1/13 5:05 at AMC Cherry Hill

A Hijacking (***)

This is the Somali pirate version of a police procedural. The particulars of the story are fictional, but everything is realistic enough that it seems otherwise. The story does not offer twists and turns, or any action —even the hijacking itself takes place off camera, experienced from the point of view of the Danish CEO being notified — but the slow buildup of tension on the part of both the captives and their families back home. The ransom negotiations are the main focus, a fascinating exercise in game theory. The CEO (Søren Malling), certainly the most memorable, and intense, character, heeds the advice of the negotiator he hires and lowballs the Somali negotiator (who denies that he himself is a pirate). But as time passes, and the captives suffer further deprivations, he must decide on his own course.

IMDb link

viewed 6/20/13 7:30 at Ritz Bourse [PFS screening] and posted 11/2/13

Pirates! Band of Misfits! (***)

What director Peter Lord calls “a schoolboy version of history” with a gloss of silliness is the unifying principle of British author Gideon Defoe’s series of novels, the first of which Lord has adapted here in appropriate cartoon form.* In Defoe’s history, Charles Darwin is a short geek wishing he had a girlfriend and employing a well-trained monkey butler/henchman who, in one of the funniest contrivances, communicates via title cards. (It’s also anachronistic, as Darwin had by the date provided, 1837, concluded his sailing days.) Queen Victoria is a wobbly, pirate-hating Machiavellian who, incidentally, looks nothing like Emily Blunt.**

The pirates themselves are led, naturally, by the Pirate Captain, whose crew includes the Albino Pirate, the Pirate with Gout, and so on. They are not all fearsome so much as not fearsome at all. The Pirate Captain is unusually kind and unusually bumbling. He’s the sort of pirate who, were this a live-action film, might be played by Hugh Grant, who instead merely lends his voice.

Though Defoe himself has crafted the screenplay, the movie differs with the book in important particulars. For example, in the book, the Pirate Captain’s crew conclude that the best part of being a pirate is the sea shanties, whereas, in the movie, they agree that it is “Ham Nite.” However, in both cases the humor, frequently, stems from infusing the story with modern sensibilities. The “pirate of the year” and “scientist of the year” presentations, upon which much of the plot revolves, become parodies of awards show. The latter is held on Blood Island, so named “because it’s the exact shape of some blood.” That bit also gives the flavor of the amusements.

Visually, the film has much appeal. The 3-D theatrical release is nice and bright, and the animation seemed flawless. As with Lord’s previous film, Chicken Run, it employs stop-motion animation. It’s remarkable that most of this was done shooting puppets frame by frame, yet you may well not notice and assume it was done by computer. I enjoyed these Pirates! but, although the comedy, as with Rango! or Bugs Bunny, has some elements pitched more at adults than kids, its appeal is slightly on the “cute” side, a problem I didn’t have with the superior Chicken Run.
_______________________________
* Gideon called his book Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists! That title was used for the UK version of the film. Perhaps it was thought that Americans (and Australians) might be frightened by the (unfounded) suggestion that there was actual science in the film.
** …who played her in Young Victoria.

IMDb link

viewed 4/17/12 at Rave UPenn [PFS screening] and reviewed 4/17–4/28/12

Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End (* 3/4)

First of all, I should say that not only was I a fan of the first Pirates movie, but I even liked the second, which seemed to split people. True, the plot was little more than an excuse for a series of set pieces, but they were really good set pieces, and in Davy Jones a worthy new villain was introduced. But gosh, what a bore this was.

There’s no reason why this should be. There’s the same director (Gore Verbinski) and writers (Ted Elliot, Terry Rossio) as before, and nearly every significant character from the other two returns. But the script is just lousy. There’s less action than before, which would be okay if what’s replaced it was at all good, or original, or comprehensible. (If you haven’t seen the previous installment, forget about it.)

Things start off with Captain Barbossa (Geoffrey Rush) and Elizabeth Swann (Keira Knightly) heading for Singapore to negotiate (or steal) a boat and crew to rescue Captain Jack Sparrow (Johnny Depp), the fey drunk who went down with his ship at the end of Dead Man’s Chest. Here we find the only major new character, a warlord played by Chow Yun Fat who’s most memorable for his facial scars. Meanwhile Sparrow is talking to himself, literally. Someone apparently figured that with Sparrow being such a fascinating fellow and all, it would be genius to clone him. Perhaps the same someone who decided to turn the annoying voodoo priestess Tia Dalma (Naomi Harris) into a major character?

Tia Dalma is there to help Barbossa, Swann, and Swann’s erstwhile fiancé Will Turner (an underused Orlando Bloom) rescue Jack from the titular “world’s end,” which turns out be a much duller place than you might think. After that, Barbossa quarrels with Jack, Jack quarrels with Will, Will quarrels with Elizabeth, Elizabeth quarrels with Jones (Bill Nighy), and everybody tricks somebody or gets tricked. All told, there’s about two stupefying hours of this bickering, dickering, and snickering. The lengthy battle sequence climax at least kept me awake, though even that could have been better. It more or less resolves the military and romantic subplots of the trilogy, but in a silly, unconvincing way. Here and there are some decent moments, most involving Knightly (who arguably has the lead role), but there are no true highlights. Yes, $100 million of special effects look good, yet with the exception of the dueling Jacks and some crabs, they’re the same effects you’ve already seen in service of a plot—and I use the term loosely—that’s mostly rehash and major characters who we learn nothing new about.

Perhaps the weight of expectations, or the need to tie up all those plotlines, has caused the production to collapse under its own weight. The result isn’t quite as bad as Spy Kids 3-D, or Austin Powers in Goldmember, but it’s the most disappointing of May’s three trilogy endings.

By the way, there’s a short scene after the closing credits, should you wish to get your full 167 minutes’ worth.

[reviewed 5/27/07]

IMDB link