ROTTEN TOMATOES: Keith Richards WILL Show Up in "Pirates 3"

Keith Richards WILL Show Up in "Pirates 3"

by Scott Weinberg | June 26, 2006

Discuss Article | Blog Article | Email To A Friend

Ever since Johnny Depp admitted to using Keith Richards as semi-inspiration for his Captain Jack character, gossip and speculation have indicated that the Rolling Stone rocker would make an appearance in the "Pirates of the Caribbean" sequels. Well, he definitely isn't in Part 2, but...

IGN FilmForce finally got the answer out of director Gore Verbinski, and here it is: ""Keith is definitely going to be in the third movie… It's a small part, but it's a great part." So is he playing the father of Jack Sparrow? "No comment. To be interpreted."

Click here for the full FilmForce feature, which also delivers some all-new speculation on future "Pirate" adventures.

"Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest" opens on July 7th.

Related Items

Movie:	Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest

Celeb:	Johnny Depp
	Keith Richards
	Gore Verbinski

(1-16 of 16 posts) | Reply

dracus writes:
on Jun 26 2006 06:49 AM

Finally, the perfect fit! What a wasted opportunity it would have been for all involved in the Pirate’s movies if Richards didn't have at least a cameo. Now there won't any regrets or the eternal "What if?" question if he didn't appear in at least one. Let the hype for Pirates 3 begin!

(Reply to this)

IMAmoose24 writes:
on Jun 26 2006 07:22 AM

..It already has, and its no good. This movie, like spiderman 3, is being too hyped for it's own good. The last film was pretty good, but nothing spectacular. This one is shaping up to be the same.

(Reply to this)

South_park300 writes:
on Jun 26 2006 07:38 AM

IMAmoose24,
you are SO freakin wrong. what is your problem with spidey and pirates? these are 2 great franchises, and many will agree.

(Reply to this)

cgcbooks writes:
on Jun 26 2006 08:00 AM

In reply to this comment (#838804)
Spider-man 2 made less money than the first one. How come?

(Reply to this)

South_park300 writes:
on Jun 26 2006 08:02 AM

wait, isn't this thread about the PIRATE movies?

...and money doesn't measure how good a movie is. people need to realize that

(Reply to this)

new12play writes:
on Jun 26 2006 08:15 AM

In reply to this comment (#838805)
I think 370 million didn't disappoint anyone. I think the missing 30 million has more to do with DVD's then quality of movie.

(Reply to this)

aconline writes:
on Jun 26 2006 09:10 AM

How can we judge Pirates 3 without seeing Pirates 2? I don't care who they cast, yet. After I see how turns out and does in the box office, I will make my judgement then.

(Reply to this)

South_park300 writes:
on Jun 26 2006 09:23 AM

oh, i love the spiderman and pirates movies. im just making a crack on the one who said spiderman2 didnt make as much money.

you can't judge how good a movie is by how it does in the box office. i mean seriously, CLICK got #1 this weekend. if there was justice, CARS would have gotten #1 again. Doesn't mean all movies that do well are bad, many are actually very good. But you can't judge a movie by the money it makes.

(Reply to this)

new12play writes:
on Jun 26 2006 09:39 AM

In reply to this comment (#838809)
Which is why I love to see movies like Eternal Sunshine and Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang...even Running Scared, which I thought was a great guilty pleasure. Movies that don't do great at the box office doesn't translate to their quality.

(Reply to this)

cgcbooks writes:
on Jun 26 2006 09:47 AM

In reply to this comment (#838809)
The studios judge a movie by the amount it makes so they can determine if sequels will be made. If Spider-Man had only made 100 million, like say Daredevil, they would never have even considered a second film. So the amount of money a film makes is very important. So don't expect Elektra 2, Daredevil 2 or Catwoman 2 any time soon. No big loss anyway.

(Reply to this)

Merlin235 writes:
on Jun 26 2006 10:09 AM

If you adjust for ticket inflation, Spiderman2 made only 15mill less than the first movie. That's about 4.5% less. I don't think anyone at Sony would quibble at that loss. Especially considering that it opened at$25million less than the first movie....that means it actually had BETTER legs in it's boxoffice run than the first movie. Pretty good for a sequel. Here's my theory: the first really good, highly anticipated summer blockbuster opening in May is going to make a killing opening weekend. People are just salivating waiting for a big movie. Spiderman opened in May, SM2 opened in July. That's the difference right there. Depending on the marketing how the trailers make it look, when Spiderman3 opens in May 07 it is going to be HUGE.

(Reply to this)

InfinityCorp writes:
on Jun 26 2006 12:09 PM

I pick "Pirates" to be the number one (#1) film of the summer.
Superman will open with a fantastic weekend.
Unfortunetly, when "Pirates" opens it will crush the man of steel.

(Reply to this)

cgcbooks writes:
on Jun 26 2006 12:50 PM

In reply to this comment (#838812)
It will depend on what goes up against it. If it has no competition it will make more money.

(Reply to this)

Merlin235 writes:
on Jun 26 2006 01:31 PM

In reply to this comment (#838814)
Agreed. But there seems to be a connection with opening in May. Look at Spiderman, Shrek 2, X-men III (massive opening weekend, and if it hadn't been destroyed by bad word of mouth it would have been larger)....People are waiting for a big summer movie to open, tired of the crud released in the winter. Again I say, SP3 is going to be huge.

(Reply to this)

new12play writes:
on Jun 26 2006 01:54 PM

Word of mouth is the key, however. A movie won't reach its potential if people aren't telling others how good it is. The number one movie of all time didn't break any opening records. It had the legs that are associated with spread of positive reviews (Titanic-600 million). If Superman can reach the audience after its initial wave of promotion, then it has as good as chance as any at reaching those 400 million plateaus that screams Star Wars territories. I just hope to see a movie sometime in the near future that can compete with the runaway blockbuster that was Titanic.

(Reply to this)

Roadhg67 writes:
on Jun 27 2006 03:16 PM

In reply to this comment (#838812)
how can you say that? Ticket inflation means that the gap was MUCH bigger... The tickets prices are going up, not down! Meaning, Spiderman by today's standards would have made $444 million, and Spiderman 2 would have made $385 million... that is a $59 million difference, not $15 mil...

(Reply to this)