[CRITICAL] PIRATES OF the CARIBBEAN : THE REVENGE OF SALAZAR

Returning awkwardly to the origins of the saga, Pirates of the Caribbean – The Revenge of Salazar is diminished by a narrative that is botched and disappointing.

Family adventure redorant imaging of piracy on the big screen, the saga of Pirates of the Caribbean returns with the iconic captain Jack Sparrow (Johnny Depp). Anti-hero Disney for excellence, this character deceitful, alcoholic and secrecy contrasted with the characters in more conventional blacksmith Will Turner (Orlando Bloom) and the daughter of the british governor, Elizabeth Swann (Keira Knightley), both in love. These were launched despite themselves, in a history of piracy, they made the meeting of the first with that they are left behind to face the most terrible curses of the oceans, during the three films. A little apart, the fourth episode of the saga – The Fountain Of Youth – couldn’t keep the character of Johnny Depp. Despite his success in the classroom, the most expensive film in the history of the cinema disappointed, because its the scenario that is considered flawed and little sought after. Thus, the saga had struggled to survive without the presence of the other two heavyweights that are Bloom and Knightley.

Announcing the long-awaited return of these old friends, the fifth episode (THE REVENGE OF SALAZAR) reactive in the first few minutes and all hopes of reconnecting with the origins of the saga, starting where the story ended at the end of the third installment while departing towards other horizons : on the one hand, the son of Will Turner goes in search of Jack Sparrow to help him rescue his father from his curse. Of another, the latter is chased by a killer of pirates, until then, unknown.

But once the planted setting, the film became embroiled in a succession of scenes still more extravagant than the others, which merely fuelled painfully good script light. A story somewhat far-fetched, which, in its simplisme, does not allow the spectator to actually feel involved in what is shown to him. And it is a pity, because the film hides in him a real potential that would have restored a real dynamic to the saga : of young people related to the former, the return of these latter, and a new villain. Making us think the terrible Davy Jones or the couple Knightley / Bloom, these new entrants reflect in spite of all the desire of the filmmakers and producers to take all the elements that made the success of the saga without going too deep. Result is an ill-copied and pasted since the plot, very rhythmic, does unfortunately not have the time to build a real foundation that would allow for the characters of the new generation to take to the thickness and most of all, be considered as being truly important in the universe of the saga. Although incarnated by Javier Bardem, he lacks the villain all its horror so that its presence is legitimate. In addition to this, the most iconic characters (except Jack Sparrow) only make very brief appearances, which spoils the film which is of interest only because of them. A greater involvement on their part would have enabled us to feed this weak story surrounded by small plots sugarcoated and inappropriate.

“The plot of this fifth Pirates of the Caribbean has quite a bit of interest. “

Even if the trilogy original was equipped with the essential codes specific to family films to big budget (the handsome brave hero, the love story, etc) is not hindered in any way because they were put at the service of a story that was in the road, an original universe…, in short, something solid. However, here, the use slow and poor of the supernatural, the exuberance of humour, turning the characters into clowns, the action guignolesque stuffy in the frame of the story, the easy accomplishment of the trials that the hero must face, are all elements that make the whole factitious, artificial, bidonné, that the all-digital endorse for good. The whole purpose of the saga, since the first episode, however, was to make credible an adventure of the supernatural by a balance between the real and the imaginary. The mythology of Pirates of the Caribbean was defined by its character temperate. Both dark and whimsical, fun, serious, mystical and practical, it actait the meeting of our real world a bit cramped (and that of the land, governing English, of the famous blacksmith and his beloved) with the world of all possibilities, of all the freedoms (one of the boats sailing towards the unknown, pirates, curses ocean). Because that rant wasn’t too far away, we believed in it.

However, here, by his willingness to put full the sight, the film lost the saga to its very essence. Its authenticity is swept, it does not look like more than a simple blockbuster family lost in the middle of the other, does not stand out simply by the fact that it is tagged Pirates of the Caribbean. Playing on the memory of the previous episodes in order to legitimize the existence of THE VENGEANCE OF SALAZAR, the producers likely wanted to reproduce what has been done with the new trilogy Star Wars : launch a new generation while keeping what fits in the breath of the ” old ” public in this franchise very lucrative. If the bet is for the moment successful, for the universe of George Lucas, unfortunately, it is not quite reached for Pirates of the Caribbean. Of hope, THE REVENGE OF SALAZAR is finally the symbol of a saga that withers and dies.

Yohann Sed

Your opinion ?

[CRITICAL] PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN : THE REVENGE OF SALAZAR
Original title :

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales

Realization :

Joachim Rønning & Espen Sandberg

Screenplay : Jeff Nathanson

Main actors : Johnny Depp, Javier Bardem, Geoffrey Rush

Release Date : may 24, 2017

Duration : 2h09min
1.0Disappointing
Notice to readers 24 reviews

Posts created 2002

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Posts

Begin typing your search term above and press enter to search. Press ESC to cancel.