"Dead Man's Chest" Hits $1 Billion

Whoopy...that movie didn't deserve to make over $200 million worldwide...such a disappointment. At World's End better not suck...

Sep 10 - 03:24 AM

jeremy d

[b]shut up[/b]

Sep 10 - 03:59 AM

Robert Kimberlin

No film will ever pass Titanic!

Sep 10 - 06:52 AM

gerke kleinsmit

[b]k[/b]
well a lot of films (6 or 7) were seen by more viewers but made less money ofcourse due to inflation. but you're prob correct in that no new movie will surpass it in the next so many years. or could we be wrong and could shrek3 topple the boat story cus other from that movie i can't think up a movie (in preproduction or concept) that has a good shot at it.

Sep 15 - 07:04 AM

J D

Pirates 2 had a large target audience, but the film was pretty inadequate from a story standpoint. I still believe that Ted and Terry's best actual script was for The Mask of Zorro, where I thought the drama, comedy, and over-the-top story scenarios were at just the right blend.

Pirates 2 had a lot of fun moments, with a great punch-line ending(which kept me entertained enough), but there were just so many other script issues: character development problems and unneeded fluff, that I have to side with the critics on this one. Even Pirates 1 was flawed, but not this badly.

Much of Pirates 2 owes its success to the splended production design, costume design, wild visual effects, and some bits of humor . . . because without them, this film wouldn't be very distinctive or potent. And yet it's just enough of an echo of the first(while pushing it's scope way further) to please most moviegoers.

Its success is probably a combination of it being pretty much the most consistently amusing and awe-inspiring entry this summer, while riding on the goodwill generated from the first film. But then again, Star Wars: The Phantom Menace, The Matrix Reloaded, and X3 were successes(and Pirates 2 is nowhere near as dreadful as those) . . . but for people who equate earnings with good moviemaking, consider some of the past examples.

Sep 10 - 07:57 AM

Simon Parker

I can't see why people disliked Pirates 2 as much as they did. I was there the first day it was released and the audience I saw it with loved it, not a bad word was uttered about it. As soon as the critics got their say about it then everyone just suddenly seemed to hate the poor thing. It was a great laugh, had awesome action and Johnny Depp upping his performance from the original. Don't care what all the haters say about it, they obviously went with either too high expectations (in that case they really shouldn't try and get so excited, its just a movie after all) or they simply wanted to hate a movie that really is not hateful.

Sep 10 - 08:26 AM

Nancy Elizabeth

Wow! A Billion. Congrats Piraters!

Sep 10 - 09:25 AM

Danny Sybrenson

Titanic was horrid. I'm happy for Dead Man's Chest, it was a fantastic movie with an amazing cast. I cannot wait for this third movie.

And 02PARSIM, they hated Dead Man's Chest because it's a sequel. These people always rag on sequels. And they criticize movies for not being 'accurate' and what the stories and the books say they should be. A bundle of idiocy, to judge films like that. I've met so many moronic people like that and it's really horrid.

And tell me, all you that criticize the movie. If it was so bad, how did it reach the one billion mark worldwide? I'll tell you why. Because many people went to see it again. And again. Stop being critics. The critics never speak for the public anymore.

Sep 10 - 11:17 AM

Grady Smith

I don't know how many people here read Box Office Prophets, but they said it best when they said that Pirates 2's advertising campaign let shine the most important aspect in Summer box office - FUN! No one can deny that the Pirates 2 trailer simply sold, action, humor, and straight up fun to audiences. People go to the movies to have fun, and if you play up the careless-summer-joyous-magical-fun level in your advertising, people will come. Look at something like Superman- that movie had a rather dark, serious preview, and resulted in a disappointing box office. Spider-Man on the other hand had that fun, "Who am I? I'm Spider-Man!" and it made over twice as much. Or take the Mission Impossible movies for instance: MI2's previews had that popcorn-munching, heart racing, fun energy around it, and it did very well. Granted Tom Cruise definitely hurt MI3's total box office, but I think the fact that it was much darker and heavier probably subtracted a bit from its box office as well. I think if you let people know they will enjoy themselves by coming to the movies, they will listen. Just some thoughts.

Sep 10 - 12:23 PM

Denora M

YAY for Pirates!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sep 10 - 01:07 PM

J D

Those who say we "critics" read too much into movies aren't taking into account a simple aspect:

We value films based on how well they achieve their purpose. And I don't mean a purpose like the toss-off-term used around here so frequently: that "It's just popcorn fun".

The film "Speed" was popcorn entertainment . . . but it was also well-crafted. So was "Aliens". "The Terminator". "T2". "Spider-Man 2". "The Matrix". "Batman Begins". "Raiders of the Lost Arc", Jaws", "Lord of the Rings" and "E.T.". Or any Pixar movie pre-"Cars".

Pirates 2 was sloppily crafted, but managed enough entertainment value to attract large audiences for repeated attendance and solid word-of-mouth. Another example of this "sloppy-but-still-fun" club: Shrek and Shrek 2. But none of them are amazing films. The Star Wars prequels are much worse, even . . . but they played to wide attendance of course.

Just because you enjoy a film doesn't give you permission to simply call it "great" and then bash those who see fault with it. I certainly enjoy flawed films, including the Star Wars prequels once in a while . . . but I can still admit their considerable errors. And I'm not a snob-nosed critic either . . . my taste is for really well-crafted cinema, and that excludes a lot of arthouse fare as well.

So for those taking blatant emotional offense at us critics, maybe you can do better in investing some attention toward our opinions and the ideas that support them rather than turning a blind eye and making off-hand insults. Grow up.

Sep 10 - 06:46 PM

andrew kruzel

[b]You need to grow up.[/b]
You are not a real critic, you are nothing, your opinion means nothing and so i have every right to consider you a joke. I probably own more DVDS than you, seen more movies than you, and know more about movies than you so i have the right to say that this is a solid movie. Go back to your basement and write in your little nerd blog about how you were made fun of.

To everyone else, screw the critics they are nothing but a bunch of losers. Remember the old quote, "Those that are not artistic become critics." There opinions are their opinions so they mean nothing, they are not fact and the only persons opinion that matters is yours. Critics loved Superman Returns yet they were too blind to see how bad a movie it was. Sorry but a Comic Book movie that does not include one single punch is a bad movie.

Sep 11 - 02:18 AM

jack rainey

The first question I have for you, Mr. "Critic", is who the flip annointed you a "critic' to begin with? Did you pay to go to some 3 day seminar and walk away with an official looking certificate of completion? Did you even sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night? What special talent do you THINL you possess that allows you to "value films based on how they achieve their purpose"? And what kind of hyper-babble gobbledygook is that anyway? Achieve their purpose?! What the hell was the purpose that "Speed", "Aliens", and "The Terminator" achieved that POTC2 did not? Explain what factors you used to come to the conclusion that "Batman Begins" was well crafted, but POTC2 wasn't? I ask again. Show me proof, give me tangible evidence how you developed this superior intellect of yours. Convince me that your opinion is more valuable, more coherent, or more useful than a cab driver, my barber, or the waitress over at Denny's. The fact is, Zen Bullet, if you truely are a critic and not some dullisional psychotic, you and your fellow limp wrists serve absolutely no useful purpose to society. You are irrelevant.

Grow up? You, if you are an a-typical average every day run of the mill movie critic, then you bathe 2 twice a week whether you need to or not, don't ever comb your hair, and your idea of formal dress is a t-shirt with sleeves, cargo shorts, and flip flops. You spend day after day sitting in movie theaters watching movies. Tell you what, sport model. I'll grow up if you'll go out and get a job.

Sep 12 - 09:01 PM

Alex Vazquez

Oh lord.

I'm going to start this off by saying that I've spent the last half hour or so browsing through these message boards, reading all these meaningless arguments about god-knows-what.

They're all so damn funny.

I was going to argue the legitimacy and meaning of critics, but I thought twice. I don't want to stoop to anyone's level here. Hell, I dunno why I'm even posting right now.

I guess I just wanted to say you're all very entertaining people. Keep up the good work.

Sep 14 - 06:54 PM

Paul Barrett

Grow up? You, if you are an a-typical average every day run of the mill movie critic, then you bathe 2 twice a week whether you need to or not, don't ever comb your hair, and your idea of formal dress is a t-shirt with sleeves, cargo shorts, and flip flops. You spend day after day sitting in movie theaters watching movies. Tell you what, sport model. I'll grow up if you'll go out and get a job.

Boy, no stereotyping there. I know all three of the movie critics in my hometown and not of them match this description. The fact is, everybody who writes in a forum and says this movie sucks and this movie doesn't is a critic, just not a paid one. I think you guys just need to accept that you're not going to agree about this movie and move on, because neither one of you is going to persuade the other to his (I assume you're both male because of all the testosterone in the air) point of view.

Sep 16 - 12:43 PM

Billy Davidson

"Those who say we "critics" read too much into movies aren't taking into account a simple aspect:

We value films based on how well they achieve their purpose. And I don't mean a purpose like the toss-off-term used around here so frequently: that "It's just popcorn fun".

The film "Speed" was popcorn entertainment . . . but it was also well-crafted. So was "Aliens". "The Terminator". "T2". "Spider-Man 2". "The Matrix". "Batman Begins". "Raiders of the Lost Arc", Jaws", "Lord of the Rings" and "E.T.". Or any Pixar movie pre-"Cars".

Pirates 2 was sloppily crafted, but managed enough entertainment value to attract large audiences for repeated attendance and solid word-of-mouth. Another example of this "sloppy-but-still-fun" club: Shrek and Shrek 2. But none of them are amazing films. The Star Wars prequels are much worse, even . . . but they played to wide attendance of course.

Just because you enjoy a film doesn't give you permission to simply call it "great" and then bash those who see fault with it. I certainly enjoy flawed films, including the Star Wars prequels once in a while . . . but I can still admit their considerable errors. And I'm not a snob-nosed critic either . . . my taste is for really well-crafted cinema, and that excludes a lot of arthouse fare as well.

So for those taking blatant emotional offense at us critics, maybe you can do better in investing some attention toward our opinions and the ideas that support them rather than turning a blind eye and making off-hand insults. Grow up."

And your some hot shot movie critic....plz......just cause you post your thoughts on a forum or in a small city paper doesn't mean you can call yourself as one of them......

Sep 10 - 07:26 PM

yo moma

looks like DMC has an outside chance of passing up Return of the King. Never thought that would happen

Sep 10 - 10:19 PM

First Last

some people spend WAY too much time in thier forum responses.
seems more people LOVED dead man's chest than disliked it. get over it.

Sep 11 - 08:55 AM

Bryan Winter

ET got some pretty bad reviews when it first came out. So did Star Wars ("a mild diversion for the kids while you go see Annie Hall" or something like that). But time and a fanbase have given them "classic" status. I mean, c'mon, if you boil them down Star Wars is just a tired old fairytale story with spaceships, and ET was just another boy and his dog story. Not really groundbreaking, but enough to work on audiences.

Not every movie has to be important, it just has to be entertaining. Mission accomplished. Go suck on your sour grapes elsewhere if you can't get it through your skulls that the only way Pirates 2 could have reached a billion is because a LOT of people all over the world went to see it more than one time. There's absolutely nothing wrong with a big bucket of pure popcorn, as long as the popcorn is tasty enough that you want a second helping. Pirates achived that. Deal with it. It isn't Schindlers List, and it was never supposed to be. It's not and never will be Best Picture, and was never trying to be.

There were two types of reviews of Pirates 2, and they were the essentially the same argument. The bad reviews said, "Eh, it's just more of the same." The good reviews said, "Yay! It's more of the same!" Well, the box office is the final judge, and it has judged that "More of the same" is exactly what audiences wanted. So just prepare yourselves for Pirates 3, because it will also be more of the same. And I for one can't wait.

Sep 11 - 09:08 AM

J D

For all the bickering around here, nobody seems to actually read what I post.

I for one enjoy being entertained by movies. Duh.

But I also find it worthwhile to acknowledge that people have a different threshold for tolerating(or even noticing) a film's problems. an aquaintance of mine couldn't deal with the fake-looking creature in the movie Alien . . . which kills the impact of the film for him. Now we all could laugh, but at the same time, I think it's worth noticing how we all come to the movies with different tolerances and biases. Some of us want to have a fun ride. Some want a great story. Some want some sort of emotional fulfillment. Others desire to learn something.

I am not usually bothered by poor visual effects, but I do take issue with meager storytelling as exhibited in films like Pirates 2 and X-men 3.

Plot and character-wise, the first Pirates was way better than the sequel. I've already written a laundry list of reasons elsewhere that nobody seemed to bother reading. On the other hand, the visual effects and production design were much stronger in the sequel. Also successful was much of the humor.

And for a large portion of the film's target audience, the strength and continuity of the plot and the characters didn't matter so much . . . hence the film's success.

But if you take an unbiased look at Pirates 2, and if you are well-versed in analyzing cinema, you'll notice problems with it that should have been fixed, that might have tipped it into "E.T." or "Indiana Jones" territory.

In a movie discussion forum I thought film-DISCUSSION was the order of the day. Somehow, despite my efforts, it keeps digressing into a "my thingy is bigger than your thingy" contest based purely on intolerance. Now if you don't care for my(or some other individual's) analysis, then feel free not to participate. But trying to ignite a bickering contest is really immature, and all too frequent on this site. There's no call for it, whether you're in support of a film or not.

Sep 11 - 01:15 PM

Brave Sir Rob

My man, I don't disagree on any particular point... but evidently you forget who it was that used the phrase "Grow up" before any of this bickering had started. Admit it: you tossed that in just to pick a fight and then play the holier-than-thou card when somebody took the bait. Admit it! Cancer merchant!

Sep 11 - 08:10 PM

Paulette Simone

The scenes in this film seemed to drag on and on to me. I fell asleep in it, even tho I love Johnny Depps work he couldn't keep me interested.

Sep 12 - 08:23 PM

brian Firenzi

I look forward to aknddon3's next post regarding basements.

"Pirates" didn't hold anybody at gunpoint to go see the movie, by the way. We all threw money down for a sequel that came in, upped the ante on the special effects, changed little else, and set everyone up for a third installment. Was anyone expecting a b***job in addition?

Sep 11 - 05:32 PM

Brave Sir Rob

And how do you take "blatant emotional offense?" What does that even mean? It has lots of syllables, though, so that's mighty impressive. Killer boots, man!

Sep 11 - 08:12 PM

Hunter Rose

All these 'problems' will be fixed in the 3rd movie, as it is obviously meant to be.

Sep 12 - 04:23 PM

Joey Chid

the first film was pretty good, but the second film though fun after about an hour it got really boring, the fun was going down the drain and all of that stuff on davy jone's boat were boring, so though this movie was alright it dosen't desreve 1 million oh well whatever anyway yeah i hope number 3 is better and stuff and i am out.

Sep 13 - 04:33 PM