Dead Man's Chest vs. Superman Returns

[Carmine Falcone]

Dead Man's Chest. I absolutely loved Nighy as Davy Jones.

 

[The Kid]

No, that was Curse of the Black Pearl.



Here's the thing about Back to the Future Part II. It may have continued from the first one and continued into the third one, but that does not make it a setup movie. It was part of a series, but it stands on its own and has its own plot. The only thing is that at the end, it happens to integrate a cliffhanger. Parts II and III don't encompass one giant adventure; they're two seperate escapades that happen to occur back to back (figuratively speaking).

IMO, the example of The Two Towers is inadequate because you can't use Lord of the Rings for an example of something like that. All three films in the trilogy are essentially one long story broken up into three installments.

I can agree with The Matrix Reloaded, as everything in that movie led up to the events of The Matrix Revolutions. The other two, IMO, don't fly.

Maybe your're right about lotr. It's really just one big movie. That's also how I view the last two bttf movies because they're so dependent on each other... moreso than the first one was. When I watch them, I really can't think of them as seperate escapades in that sense. Like pirates 2 and 3, they were filmed at the same time, have the same feel (well I guess pirates 3 will) and of course both end in cliffhangers with the hero/heros planning to rescue their lost friend. It's a bit of a wrath of khan or esb-ish thing isn't it...

But I know what you're saying. Bttf2 does have its own little story and then suddenly out of nowhere dock is zapped into the past and that sets up the sequel. Pirates 2 is more like reloaded then in that it really doesn't seem to me to work on its own much without needing the last part to finish the puzzle... That's what I'm saying was my biggest gripe. I figure that if you're going to make a movie, make it complete so the audience doesn't have to wait so long for the next half...

 

[Galactus]

If I could I would have voted "equally decent". Neither awesome or crap, but still two of the better summer movies this year

 

[matrix_ghost]

Easy for me at least : POTC .

I always felt that despite all the VFX , the storylines and acting performances , the ONE FACTOR that was with POTC was simply this : FUN

You get that right , then the movie is hit. SR failed miserably at that and i think the FUN factor is also the reason why movies like Spiderman 1 & 2 are a hit and especially FF despite it being slaughtered by critics and fanboys.

I saw POTC 6 times as opposed to SR 4 times. But you'll be saying , wait a minute this guy doesn't like SR yet he saw it four times ?
Well i only paid for 1 ticket of SR , all the other times someone hadn't seen the flick and asked me if i wanted to tag along if he/she bought my ticket.
On the other hand i BOUGHT my tickets for POTC all 6 times.

Anyways going back to POTC , i really did enjoy it. Didn't have nearly as much as laughs as the first movie but it was still the fun. The island sequence always makes me laugh and the CG work combined with the performance of Bill Nighy is truly amazing.

 

[Halcohol]

"Both where awesome!"

Where, exactly, is the 'awesome'? I'll go to where the awesome is, that's for sure.

 

[Spoarz™]

Superman Returns for me.

 

[BloodyWolverine]

No, that was Curse of the Black Pearl.



Here's the thing about Back to the Future Part II. It may have continued from the first one and continued into the third one, but that does not make it a setup movie. It was part of a series, but it stands on its own and has its own plot. The only thing is that at the end, it happens to integrate a cliffhanger. Parts II and III don't encompass one giant adventure; they're two seperate escapades that happen to occur back to back (figuratively speaking).

IMO, the example of The Two Towers is inadequate because you can't use Lord of the Rings for an example of something like that. All three films in the trilogy are essentially one long story broken up into three installments.

I can agree with The Matrix Reloaded, as everything in that movie led up to the events of The Matrix Revolutions. The other two, IMO, don't fly.

Your forgetting Star Wars Episodes 4,5 and 6. that is the better example. I think you can include Rings in the anology .

 

[Hunter Rider]

I voted both were awesome even though i'd change that to both were good

 

[Kevin Roegele]

Both were pretty bad and I'd die happily never seeing either again

So be it. Somebody hand me a grenade.

 

[green]

Dead Man's Chest. I absolutely loved Nighy as Davy Jones.

Best thing about Pirates.

But SR was better.

 

[xwolverine2]

oh please!... no competition! DeadMansChest!!

 

[Warhammer]

...Richard and Lois are still together...

Also not his fault Lois loves him more than she loves Richard - which is quite clear in the movie.

They'll split on the next movie or Richard will die somehow.
It's destiny.

 

[PowersOfMind]

Once again James Marsden will get the short end of the stick.

 

[Lt. Figgnuts]

Your forgetting Star Wars Episodes 4,5 and 6. that is the better example. I think you can include Rings in the anology .

That works to a point, but I think the original Star Wars trilogy is similar to Back to the Future, to a point.

Each movie in the Star Wars trilogy is its own adventure, with the exception that at the end, there are still a few loose ends that need resolution. With Empire, just about everything that was set up in that film was resolved in that film - with the exception of Han, the question of Luke's paternity, and possibly whether or not Luke would go back to Yoda. Just like the question of where Doc Brown went takes Back to the Future, Part II into Part III, the questions of whether or not Han will be okay and whether or not Vader is actually Luke's father takes Empire into Jedi. They still, however, have their own mostly self-contained story and narrative.

I think if we're comparing Pirates of the Caribbean with any modern trilogy, the one that comes closest is The Matrix. In both cases, the original is pretty much standalone, but the second two pretty much need to be viewed together (presumably, in Pirates' case) to fully understand.

 

[Kira]

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Dead Mans Chest for me right now. I started watching SR with my sister who hadn't seen it yesterday but I only got threw 60percent of the movie before I got up went to another room and began playing Resident Evil 4.

 

[Cmill216]

I need to see SR again, but after seeing DMC for a second time, I actually enjoyed it a lot more than before.

 

[L0ngsh0t]

I voted both were awesome even though i'd change that to both were good

Picky picky (although probably true, because while I loved pirates it was by no means great, and I just don't like superman, so I suppose I would say neither was awesome), nice xmas touch on the avatar btw

 

[livrule]

Pirates .... by a longggggggggg way.

SR is the official dead stick of 2006.

 

[L0ngsh0t]

I would totally agree with ya^

 

[Hunter Rider]

Both these would probably struggle to be in my top 5 for this year and i liked both

 

[Cmill216]

Both these would probably struggle to be in my top 5 for this year and i liked both

I personally enjoyed both spy flicks, MiIII and CR, more than these two.

 

[Hunter Rider]

I personally enjoyed both spy flicks, MiIII and CR, more than these two.

Me to,i also prefered The Prestige,Miami Vice and V for Vendetta

 

[L0ngsh0t]

Me to,i also prefered The Prestige,Miami Vice and V for Vendetta

I like Prestige, but not better then Pirates, same goes with Vice, V for Vendetta was brillaint, and definatly better then Pirates, Casino Royale was more then likely better then Pirates, but I have only seen it once

By no means do I think Pirates is cinematic greatness, but it was very entertaining movie

It wouldn't be in my top 5 though, more then likely not in my top 10 ether, but maybe

 

[Lt. Figgnuts]

There was so much wrong with Dead Man's Chest...