First of all, I basically think there isn't any logic to these movies, and we are continuously beating our heads against the walls trying to come up with one. The first movie was a fluke. I think Disney thought it would generate decent sales because Johnny's star was rising, Orlando's star was still burning bright from LOTR, and Keira was coming off of Bend It Like Beckham and could prove that she could hold her own on a screen. Plus, she was/is truly flat out gorgeous and probably Orlando Bloom is one of the few actors who can actually not look dowdy standing next to her. So I don't think Disney execs were paying too much attention to this little sleeper, which is why Penny could actually do period costumes (roughly, because who in the hell knows when this really took place) and play to her little heart's content. And Johnny could do the kohl thing and the gold teeth thing and grab the character of Jack Sparrow and make it his own.
And then it made a ton of money. The suits arrived in full force and even the small remnants of authenticity and rationality went out the window. Because there WAS a rationale that held together in the first movie, and held together pretty damn well. I think that the clothes because yet another victim of the stupid plot machinations. Remember that wedding dress thing? And, although you and I are mostly sympatico on most things POTC-ish, I thought dressing Elizabeth Swann up as some sort of Chinese ship captain was absolutely balderdash and not a little racist. And then we have Norrington restored to his naval dress blues just do they could kill him.
Yet clothes in this era were so important, and it seems like such a small thing to try to preserve that. There is a reason why sumptuary laws went in and out of vogue because they signaled your class; your place in the pecking order. That corset that Elizabeth wears during Norrington's proposal was beautifully symbolic. Just as symbolic as Jack saving her from the water (HIS territory) and then cutting her out of it. And lest you think I'm treading into sparrabeth territory, it's just as symbolic as Will getting struck by the ship's boom. This is Jack's territory where the old rules don't apply, so be fast on your feet. And it's the ONLY territory where a blacksmith and a governor's daughter can even retain the remote possibility of getting married.
Because of the expectations set up by the first movie, I reasonably figure a POTC movie is going to give me more than a Bugs Bunny cartoon, don't you?
Well, I guess we were both naive. Again, haven't seen the fourth movie but Jack shouldn't be the center of any movie. Part of what makes Jack work is that he is the catalyst for all the other character's dilemmas. He's supporting character material. I think you start to introduce all kinds of problems by making him a central character primarily because he's the person who creates chaos and if you have a central character who creates chaos, then how does the movie center hold up?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2011-06-05 10:37 pm (UTC)And then it made a ton of money. The suits arrived in full force and even the small remnants of authenticity and rationality went out the window. Because there WAS a rationale that held together in the first movie, and held together pretty damn well. I think that the clothes because yet another victim of the stupid plot machinations. Remember that wedding dress thing? And, although you and I are mostly sympatico on most things POTC-ish, I thought dressing Elizabeth Swann up as some sort of Chinese ship captain was absolutely balderdash and not a little racist. And then we have Norrington restored to his naval dress blues just do they could kill him.
Yet clothes in this era were so important, and it seems like such a small thing to try to preserve that. There is a reason why sumptuary laws went in and out of vogue because they signaled your class; your place in the pecking order. That corset that Elizabeth wears during Norrington's proposal was beautifully symbolic. Just as symbolic as Jack saving her from the water (HIS territory) and then cutting her out of it. And lest you think I'm treading into sparrabeth territory, it's just as symbolic as Will getting struck by the ship's boom. This is Jack's territory where the old rules don't apply, so be fast on your feet. And it's the ONLY territory where a blacksmith and a governor's daughter can even retain the remote possibility of getting married.
Because of the expectations set up by the first movie, I reasonably figure a POTC movie is going to give me more than a Bugs Bunny cartoon, don't you?
Well, I guess we were both naive. Again, haven't seen the fourth movie but Jack shouldn't be the center of any movie. Part of what makes Jack work is that he is the catalyst for all the other character's dilemmas. He's supporting character material. I think you start to introduce all kinds of problems by making him a central character primarily because he's the person who creates chaos and if you have a central character who creates chaos, then how does the movie center hold up?