Pirates of the Caribbean 3

I have formulated a standard for determining which movies I really like, and it is based on DVD ownership. What is interseting is that we don't ever own any movies we buy, sure we own the actual disc, but copyright law only gives us access to the movie. Here are the three categories in my "DVD ownership" method: 1. I see a movie in the theater and before it's even over I know I want the DVD. 2. I walk out of the theater, I'm glad I saw the movie, but if I never see it again I'll be just fine. 3. I sit through the movie (walking out on a movie must be reserved for the very worst) and dread having to see commercials for the DVD in the coming months because the movie is so lame. What's funny about this system is if you really put it to the test, you don't need to buy many DVDs. Most movies aren't worth watching in the first place, and so many more don't deserve a second chance. Pay respect by only purchasing those cream of the crop DVDs, perhaps it'll send a message to filmmakers, and we won't get any more "Matrix Revolutions" or "Pirates of the Caribbean 2s"...

That's right, I said "Pirates of the Caribbean 2" in the same sentance as "Matrix Revolutions". If you don't understand how much a slap in the face that was intended to be, perhaps you should reaxamine your taste in movies. I could go into why part two wasn't good, but since this is a review of part three, let's move on... "Pirates of the Caribbean 3" falls into the second categoy of my DVD test. I'm glad I saw it. Johnny Depp was great, and had a fair amount of the movie's focus. The upside down ship was super sweet, actually the whole sequence of events leading up to it (Depp's nose to the draining of the water). There were funny moments. Awesome moments. Perfectly carried out moments (Captain Jack's dad). But that's just not enough. Please note that if I list a bunch of specific qualities about a movie, but cannot formulate a paragraph that explains how everything worked together, then it wasn't a great movie. Here's a paragraph for you:

The main problem I have with "Pirates of the Caribbean 3" is that there are too many characters, most of whom are non-essential to the convoluted plot. Low level pirates, love-scorned goddesses, and incompetent soldiers feel like filler in a movie that has a couple great perfomances and a cool concept. Sparrow and Barbossa could carry this film single-handedly, but in many scenes are reduced to background, which is unfortunate because I so much want to see more of them. The movie wasn't an hour longer than it should have been, it was 83 cast members bigger than it should have been. The only hope I have is that since enough of those extra characters got killed off in this movie, that maybe, just maybe we'll get a streamlined group of pirates in the next one.

So far only the first "Pirate" movie has made it into the DVD ownership category, which is alright since I only have a limited space in my bookcase.

12 Angry Men and Spiderman 3

It seems as though "12 Angry Men" is on PBS quite a lot, but last night is the first time I've watched it since I was either 12 or 13 years old. When it ended, all I could think is that it should be required viewing for anyone who ever sits on a jury, actually it should probably be required viewing for everyone. Now not all aspects have aged well, and it is somewhat cheesy, but it makes it point very clearly. For those who haven't seen it, the story is about a jury of 12 men who must come to a verdict in a murder case. As the jury first enters the jury room, the initial vote is 11 to 1, most for guilty. The sole dissenter makes his case, and the movie is about everything American, from freedom of speech, right to a fair trial, faith in God, responsibility and so on. One thing I noticed this time is unlike most courtroom dramas, there are only a few seconds of footage in which the defendant is visible, and there are no flashbacks to the scene of the crime. It is all about the jury. With the advent of digital cameras, with the saturation of the news media, and with a population that is so fickle, how can we expect anyone to get a fair trial? Innocent until proven guilty (emphasis on "proven"). Found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Are these things possible? I was reminded of this little line from years ago "click me", would we rather have murderers walking the streets or innocent people in jail. Would we give up our freedom to be a little safer? I say let people take their toenail clippers on airplanes. Doesn't that answer kind of say it all?

Alright, now we're on to something not so deep... "Spiderman 3". I saw it today in IMAX, IMAX makes almost anything watchable (except last years "Superman") "Spiderman 3" was way better than part 2, and I think even better than the first. Now of course there was a lot of stuff that I shouldn't have known about (like Venom) but did because of the trailers, but what's you gonna do, right? I hate movies that put characters in situations that make me feel uncomfortable, like when the girl and boy have a misunderstanding that keeps them apart. Seriously, learn how to communicate just a little better. Fortunately, in "Spiderman 3" these moments weren't as bad as the past movies, it's almost a relief that Mary Jane knows that Peter Parker is Spiderman. The campy humor wasn't as obnoxious as the last installment, I actually laghed at the jokes instead of at the movie this time. The inclusion of three bad guys worked really well. Sam Rami did a great job of balancing the meat of the story with the overshadowing danger. At any moment one of three bad guys (or all of them, or any combination of two) could be causing havoc or waiting in the shadows. The action scenes were super sweet, they just keep getting better and better at the transitions from computer to real (and visa versa). All I have to say is this, directly to Spiderman: If you have Mary Jane, I don't care what reason you might have, even if it's to save your life or end world hunger; DON'T KISS OTHER GIRLS!!!
Stupid Spiderman! One day people will realize that Batman is the one and only true superhero, and these punks like Spiderman will fade quietly from our memory.

Amazing Grace

The Dollar theater is a place of second chances. I don't remember why I didn't go see this film in its initial run, but I corrected that neglect today. "Amazing Grace" is a great film about a man who set out to abolish slavery in Great Britian. The story is connected to the song; "Amazing Grace" in that the main character's mentor was the man who wrote the song. The hero of the story is William Wilberforce, played by Ioan Gruffud. His former preacher is John Newton (played by Albert Finney) who formerly was a slave ship captain and wrote "Amazing Grace about himself. Director Michael Apted is able to clearly and powerfully follow the historic events and the lifelong struggles of a man who desires to do what is right. Should he use his voice to praise God, or change the world? There are some great scenes and dialouge that drive home the point that he should do both. The "Amazing Grace" side story worked well to emphasise the motivation of the Wilberforce character, but really the film was about him. From his arguments in Parliament, to his quiet conversations with his wife, this film is profound, uplifting and good. I'm going to sound like a Focus on the Family movie review for a second, but the only problem I had with the whole movie, is that Wilberforce made a reference to "millions of years". I don't know enough about the actual man, but being a Christian in the late 1700s, I think it is most likely that he wouldn't have made that comment. Other than that, I think that Apted and the writer Steven Knight did a great job of making a movie about a man who honored God in his words and actions.

As a sidenote, after watching that documentary on PBS about the Mormons, it certainly was a welcome change to watch something that made my soul happy.