Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End

A beautifully sentimental ending, which somewhat saved the overall impression that was too drawn out and lacking the magic of the first film. It's just too much of a blockbuster now, a money-making machine, and it shows. The actors are great, Orlando Bloom is probably the most unbearable of all his roles here, and the special effects are beautiful, but that's already kind of standard. (14/04/2015)

Each subsequent continuation of a commercially successful blockbuster usually means that its creators wanted to surpass the previous film by increasing the budget, adding more bombastic action, more special, more of everything, and yet occasionally a film comes along that surpasses its predecessor. Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End is no exception to this rule. It is a case of screenwriting orgies, where the screenwriters literally went of their way to fit as many "shocking" twists, betrayals of the main characters, and lightning-fast changes in the situation into one film. As a result, the script does not work, and even though it is a comedy, at times it reeks of self-parody. But there is still the bombastic set design with plenty of successful digital tricks, relatively decent action, mutual teasing, and lots of small jokes, which allows me to give it three stars. It is a typical popcorn movie, where it is better not to think much and just perceive the visuals and movement on the screen. Overall impression: 50%. (09/06/2011)

The downward trend in the quality of this monstrous trilogy becomes truly unbearable in the third, and hopefully last, installment. Compared to the first part, the action sequences are unnecessarily bloated and computer-generated (the only well-shot scenes are the cannon shots). In contrast to the second part, the there’s less exaggeration and over-the-top wit from the main characters, who were not always truly funny, but the viewer was generally entertained. This can hardly be said about the third part, though. Apart from a few scenes, most situations are downright ridiculous and cliché, not to mention the incredibly muddled editing and sequence of scenes. I don't think we should incredulously shake our heads wondering if the director is serious, not even in the case of Pirates of the Caribbean. And here, there are not many restraints. (10/12/2007)

The plot twists and the chattiness of the trio of “Pirates” remind me a lot of our glorious parliament. Endless quarrels and fights, here played for the eye of the spectator, here meant seriously; on the outside they appear as irreconcilable rivals, but behind the scenes, out of the public eye, they even toast each other with "pirate rum", at one moment they are falling each other's arms, and the next they could stab each other in the back and nobody would be any wiser. The admirable precision of the production design and visual effects deserves praise, the final battle raises the overall impression a lot, but it's more than two hours long! With all that politics the creators deserve to be flogged. Or better still, they should be condemned to smell Jack Sparrow’s socks for two weeks in a row. (22/12/2007)

The opening sequence is great, the bouncing between disparate locations is filled with a satisfying amount of jokes, the production design is eye-pleasing and Geoffrey Rush is thoroughly enjoying his poorly explained comeback. But there’s something now that feels wrong. The story goes on for a frighteningly long time towards the first (saving Jack) and second (getting out of the place from which there is no escape) goals, foreshadowing the already genuinely scary middle part, which crumbles the awkwardly paced plot between a bunch of characters acting independently and often incomprehensibly, whose scheming and subterfuge may look clever on paper but in an expensive blockbuster are as ineffectual as a guy arriving for a first date with a haircut like Adolf Hitler. And of course, the whole thing drags on like a crowd of pensioners at a Kaufland discount. Fortunately, the ending is worth the wait and the carnage at sea looks as breathtaking as the technical innovations allow, which makes the amount of unnecessary filler all the more regrettable, as it doesn’t move the film anywhere and only bluntly pushes it to achieve the attribute of GREAT by, among other things, its own bloated runtime… (07/03/2017)