ROTTEN TOMATOES: "Pirates 3" Title Confirmed

"Pirates 3" Title Confirmed

by Scott Weinberg | September 01, 2006

There was some speculation that Disney might go in another direction, but it looks like "Pirates 3" will definitely arrive with its screenwriters' choice of titles: "Pirates of the Caribbean: At Worlds End." (No apostrophe.)

Screenwriters Ted Elliott & Terry Rossio ("Shrek," "National Treasure") have their very own website (Wordplayer.com, which focuses on screenwriting, obviously), and it's there that the good news was announced.

That's pretty much all I got, news-wise. Far as I'm concerned, "Worlds End" can't get here quickly enough.

Related Items

Movie:	Shrek
	National Treasure
	Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest

Celeb:	Terry Rossio
	Ted Elliott

(1-20 of 44 posts) | Reply

TheMaster847 writes:
on Sep 01 2006 07:08 AM

No apostrophe, eh? So that would mean that "Worlds" is plural. Hmmmm.

I'm excited!!!!

(Reply to this)

Bystander09 writes:
on Sep 01 2006 07:14 AM

[b]MAY 25th[/b]
HOORAH!

May 4th-Spidey 3
May 18- Shrek the third
May 25th-Pirates of the Caribbean: At Worlds End!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(Reply to this)

mrdanny writes:
on Sep 01 2006 07:50 AM

Damn!!!! I was really routing for that apostrophe!!! oh well!!

(Reply to this)

Now it's dark writes:
on Sep 01 2006 08:02 AM

I think the critics are going to be wrong about this one. Maybe even wronger than the last one, which was better than Lord of the Rings. I just hope all the haters don't get so deffensive this time. It really was quite sad.

(Reply to this)

Mikeal420 writes:
on Sep 01 2006 08:58 AM

[b]"Shrek" and National Treasure?[/b]
I'm shocked to learn that the people who wrote a script as clever and well executed as "Shrek", also wrote the script for national Treasure (a horrible film but entertainig still) I wasn't a big fan of Pirates 2, it all felt kinda pointless, (did Orlando Bloom or Jonny Depp's characters really matter?) I hope these guys can return the Pirate's franchise back around...

(Reply to this)

new12play writes:
on Sep 01 2006 09:31 AM

In reply to this comment (#843619)
Because 1 billion worldwide will forever be seen as a disappointment...

(Reply to this)

nogard64 writes:
on Sep 01 2006 09:53 AM

[b]hhmmmmm[/b]
I wouldn't call it cliche... but it seems to me ship/pirate/ocean movies/stories always seems to travel to some odd end of the world place. Examples: Greek mythos heros seem to sail to the underworld (hades) a lot (dont remember the specific ones, after awhile all the heros get jumbled into one), in one of my fav movie starring Tim Robbins, Erick the Viking sails to the Viking heaven, Vahalla. (very under rated movie btw), and in Cabin boy Chris Elliot sails to some end of the world hell esque place. So it should be interesting to see POTC's version of the end of the world.

(Reply to this)

Bystander09 writes:
on Sep 01 2006 10:27 AM

[b]Hey[/b]
Thats whats fun about Pirates movies. Traveling to some forsaken island nobodys ever been on before. I loved the second one. Yea, it was a set up, but I never had so much fun watching a set up movie.

(Reply to this)

taran72 writes:
on Sep 01 2006 10:38 AM

In reply to this comment (#843618)
I hope that is sarcasm. Tell me that's sarcas, Please.

(Reply to this)

Merlin235 writes:
on Sep 01 2006 12:01 PM

When will we all stop equating box office draw to good filmaking?

(Reply to this)

jpdsgn writes:
on Sep 01 2006 12:51 PM

In reply to this comment (#843624)
When you can accept the fact that one man's trash can be another man's treasure.

(Reply to this)

Robert Fuller writes:
on Sep 01 2006 12:55 PM

Hey, don't be hating on the people routing for this movie. You couldn't be wronger, haters. Pirates 2 was the best moovy ever made and At Worldses End will be being even better! I hate haters who hate cuz all they do is hate!

(Reply to this)

jpdsgn writes:
on Sep 01 2006 01:01 PM

In reply to this comment (#843626)
My post was in favor of the "Pirates" franchise, BTW. Both first and Second movies were treasures to me. I'm against all haters too that trash movies that don't fit their tastes. No one ever said all movies should appeal to them alone.

(Reply to this)

South_park300 writes:
on Sep 01 2006 01:13 PM

Well I dug the movie, and it deserved all the money it made. Can't wait for the third!

(Reply to this)

Infernal writes:
on Sep 01 2006 01:16 PM

In reply to this comment (#843624)
In this case, my friend, equating box office draw to good film-making is justified. No idiot's going to wait until a month after a big movie like this to see it for the first time. No. The reason Dead Man's Chest is still earning money and earned so much is not just because a lot of people went to see it. It's because a large portion of people who saw this movie once, went to see it a second time, third time, and in some cases even a fourth.

This film was fantastic, and as I said, equating box office draw to good film-making can be justified in certain cases.

(Reply to this)

new12play writes:
on Sep 01 2006 01:17 PM

It's not a fact of equating box office draw to good film making. The movie made a ridiculous amount of money, which in turn means it is by no means a disappointment. Apparently, they pleased the fans enough to have them turn out in record numbers. With it's mammoth opening only amounting to about 28% of it's total gross, I believe repeated viewings established that this film pleased the core audience and brought in newer moviegoers with word of mouth. While not a movie made to win awards (except for special effects awards) by any means, the movie has to be considered a triumph in that it gave the fans exactly what they wanted...movies don't have that distinction too often these days. Merlin, what would you consider good film making anyway? Please, arthouse and indie pictures do not apply to this discussion when you are speaking of POTC.

(Reply to this)

cgcbooks writes:
on Sep 01 2006 02:13 PM

In reply to this comment (#843620)
Money doesn't mean a good film.

(Reply to this)

Mr. K writes:
on Sep 01 2006 03:44 PM

[b]It has a crazy octopus guy[/b]
I don't understand. The movie has a damn octopus guy in it. How can it not be regarded as the greatest cinematic work created? It's a freakin' octopus guy! ...and Geoffrey Rush ...and a monkey!!! Damn, there's one billion dollars right there!

(Reply to this)

Captain Future1 writes:
on Sep 01 2006 06:08 PM

[b]In response to Mikeal420[/b]
Yea, I guess a movie making one billion worldwide was really a bad film, huh?

(Reply to this)

Cheesemon writes:
on Sep 01 2006 06:48 PM

In reply to this comment (#843615)
But then shouldn't it be "At Worlds' End"? Recently, I've been noticing that companies hate putting the apostrophe after the "s", maybe for asthetic reasons. As an English major, this decision always bugs me.

(Reply to this)

RottenTomatoes.com