Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Oh no...it's Pirates Of The Caribbean 4!

This is topic Oh no...it's Pirates Of The Caribbean 4! in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=005588

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 09-27-2008, 04:21 AM:

Link

September 26, 2008 - 9:11AM

Superstar actor Johnny Depp has signed on to three new Disney projects, including the fourth installment of the blockbuster Pirates of the Caribbean franchise, the entertainment industry newspaper Variety confirmed.

Along with the reprisal of off-beat pirate Captain Jack Sparrow, Depp will star as the long-suffering Native American sidekick Tonto in a new version of the iconic Lone Ranger, produced by hit producer Jerry Bruckheimer.

If this wasn't enough for the 45-year-old actor, Depp will also play the Mad Hatter in director Tim Burton's adaptation of the classic Alice in Wonderland, using a mix of 3D animation and performance capture technology similar to that used for 2007's Beowulf.

The announcements for Ranger, Wonderland and "an additional role" were made before a crowd of roaring fans in Hollywood Wednesday when Depp appeared at the Walt Disney Showcase, a preview of the studio's productions over the next few years.

The Pirates 4 confirmation arrived early on Thursday through the actor's representatives in Variety.

The franchise has been a worldwide phenomenon since the first installment in 2003, earning more than $US2.6 billion ($3.1 billion) at the box office.

Fans are rejoicing the actor's reunion with director Burton, who has created the milestone projects of Depp's career, including his breakout role in the 1990 blockbuster Edward Scissorhands, and 2005's Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.

Like many of Depp's roles, the new Disney projects seek to attract as many adult viewers as they do younger fans.

No premiere dates for any of the projects have been announced.

AFP

Posted by Sally Ann Burgess (Member # 4746) on 09-27-2008, 07:41 AM:

I could watch Johnny Depp in anything, the Mad Hatter role sounds perfect for him.
But I'll be happy to see Pirates 4 so long as Keira and Orlando stay out of it!
George Clooney is allegedly in talks to play the Lone Ranger, now THAT I would definitely be excited to see...Johnny AND George, is it me or is it getting hot in here...

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 09-27-2008, 08:28 AM:

There are NO bad Depp films! Louis

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 09-27-2008, 09:26 AM:

I'm no big fan of the Pirates films (other than the grosses they generate). I hate when a studio puts out "the story is now complete" vibes like they did with Pirates 3, but then a year later...."oh, not quite complete yet."

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 09-27-2008, 10:07 AM:

quote: Louis Bornwasser
There are NO bad Depp films! Louis

Redminds me of a woman that came in to see the first Pirates.

Her: I'm excited to see this. I didn't expect it to be good but all my friends said it was great.
Me: Johnny Depp is amazing in all his movies, even if the movie itself wasn't that good.
Her: I don't know. I didn't like "From Hell." It was really creepy.
Me: IT WAS ABOUT JACK THE RIPPER! What did you expect?

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 09-27-2008, 10:45 AM:

I absolutely hated Pirates 2, refused to watch 3 and will set part 4 on fire if I see a print (which I likely won't, fortunately).

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-27-2008, 11:40 AM:

Pirates 1 was pretty good. Pirates 2 was bad. Pirates 3 was terrible. I'm seeing a pattern here.

Posted by Louis Belloisy (Member # 3836) on 09-27-2008, 12:07 PM:

Johnny Depp could star in a burlap commercial and I would still like it. he has talent. I have followed him since Edward Sissorhands.

Lou

Posted by Chad Souder (Member # 343) on 09-27-2008, 04:29 PM:

quote: Brad Miller
Pirates 1 was pretty good. Pirates 2 was bad. Pirates 3 was terrible. I'm seeing a pattern here.

Well put. And it probably was because of that second one stinking that the grosses of the 3rd fell right back to where they were for the first. Its hard to predict how many dollards the 4th will make.

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 09-27-2008, 04:40 PM:

A Tim Burton version of Alice in Worderland should be very interesting.

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 09-27-2008, 05:31 PM:

Not bad for a little kid from a trailer park in Owensboro KY. Louis

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 09-27-2008, 07:33 PM:

I heard a law was signed many years ago that when Tom Burton directs a movie, Johnny Depp MUST be in it. I wonder if Burton could work without Depp? Didn't he try with some Willy Wonka nonsense, or was Depp in that, too?

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 09-27-2008, 07:36 PM:

Yep, he was in it.

Posted by Thomas Dieter (Member # 2507) on 09-28-2008, 01:01 AM:

quote: Louis Bornwasser
There are NO bad Depp films!

I beg to differ.

quote: Mike Blakesley
I hate when a studio puts out "the story is now complete" vibes like they did with Pirates 3, but then a year later...."oh, not quite complete yet."

I hate to say this, but it was inevitable. The scene after the credits gave it away.

quote: Brad Miller
Pirates 1 was pretty good. Pirates 2 was bad. Pirates 3 was terrible. I'm seeing a pattern here.

I couldn't agree with you more.

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 10-13-2008, 03:16 AM:

Hmmm...but what if Tim Burton directed the 4th installment?

Link to story

quote:

It seems as though plans for a fourth Pirates of the Caribbean movie are well underway with Johnny Depp receiving a reported US$59.2 million to reprise the role of Jack Sparrow. I don’t think the world was crying out for another pirate film, especially after the coma inducing At World’s End but recent developments have made the idea slightly more enticing.

Sources at cinemablend.com have reported that the one and only Tim Burton is being considered to direct the new entry into the billion dollar franchise. Although Gore Verbinski did a decent job, the idea of Mr. Burton’s gothic sensibilities combining with Mr. Depp’s piratey charm seems like a match made in heaven.

If that wasn’t enough, it seems as though Orlando Bloom and Keira Knightley won’t be returning and will be replaced by Jack Sparrow’s brother. Rumour has it that Sacha Baron Cohen and Russell Brand are being considered for the role. It is too soon to tell but if the rumours are true, start saving your money kids because it could be one hell of a film.

By Sebastian Cordoba

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 10-13-2008, 03:22 AM:

Yeah right... Tim Burton work with Johnny Depp? Never.

Posted by Galen Murphy-Fahlgren (Member # 4535) on 10-13-2008, 09:34 AM:

Wow, what a killer combination! Take an overhyped director, an extremely overhyped actor, and have them make the sequel to the sequel to the sequel of an extraordinarily overhyped movie! Tim Burton has been involved in 3 good movies, Johnny Depp, 2, and Pirates of the Caribbean, 0! I can't wait, especially if this one has 20 minutes of credits with a teaser at the end, because everybody knows 12 just isn't enough.

I'm sure some people are going to take strong issue with this assessment, and I have not seen the entirety of either of their filmographies, so they could have more good movies, but they would still be a small percentage of their work, in my opinion.

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 10-13-2008, 10:59 AM:

Then you and I have vast differences in opinions of acting abilities.

Depp = fantastic in From Hell, Sleepy Hollow, Secret Window (even though the movie overall was only ok), Chocolat, Blow, Ninth Gate, Charlie & the Chocolate Factory.

Posted by Joe Tommassello (Member # 4632) on 10-13-2008, 11:13 AM:

quote: Chad Souder
And it probably was because of that second one stinking that the grosses of the 3rd fell right back to where they were for the first.

Yeah, $320 million is so fucking lame!!!

quote:
Take an overhyped director, an extremely overhyped actor, and have them make the sequel to the sequel to the sequel of an extraordinarily overhyped movie!

Galen, you are demonstrating the ignorance of your youth and inexperience again. Tim Burton is one of the most creative minds in Hollywood - since before you were born. If it weren't for him there would probably not have been a "Dark Knight" this summer. And Johnny Depp? Trashing him will get you little support on this board IMHO. He may choose some quirky roles but he's one of the few actors in this day secure enough in his talent to take on a screwy character without obsessing about how it will effect his image.

Both Depp and Burton are masterful modern-day storytellers. They make films that ignite both the imagination and box office. If you are going to be in this business stop trying to be more cerebral than everyone else and figure out how to make some money! Jurassic Park 2 paid for Schindler's List! Careful you don't get fired for biting the hands that feed the industry.

Now let me ask a question of you Galen...what were Tim Burton's three good movies and Johnny Depp's two?

Posted by Galen Murphy-Fahlgren (Member # 4535) on 10-13-2008, 01:01 PM:

I'm not suggesting that Depp is a bad actor, I in fact think he is quite good. A good actor does not a good movie make, or role for that matter. I liked Edward Scissorhands and Chocolat. I liked him in Fear and Loathing and Blow, but did not think they were good movies. I have not seen Ed Wood, which I hear is a tour de force, but see my comment about not having seen all of their movies.

Burton, of course, wrote, produced and directed the aforementioned Edward Scissorhands, and directed Big Fish and Pee Wee's Big Adventure. And then there is Ed Wood, which I once again have not seen. I have seen a much smaller percentage of his total works, so I may be a bit quick to judge, but his recent works and those most often associated with him are particularly bad, in my opinion. (Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, Planet of the Apes, Sweeney Todd. He wrote and produced Nightmare Before Christmas, whose only virtue is its technical excellence.)

I may give them too little credit, but I really believe they are given far too much credit by most, and there is also the fact that the Pirates franchise is lacking in, shall we say, good-ness? Even if Burton were the magnificent director you claim he is, and Depp the incomparable character actor, what can you do with crap?

I also don't think I'm biting the hand that feeds here. I think exhibitors need to be critical of on screen product in much the same way they are of concession product. Would you stock crappy quality seed or samosas, or use inferior oil? You might sell thousands of dollars of corn a weekend for a while, but eventually people are going to stop eating it. What do you do with you 16- and 20-plexes when the metaphorical corn gets too nasty for people to swallow? I believe the industry is going to have a contraction within the next few years, where there isn't enough product to justify having an enormous number of screens, and I think the credit situation is going to hasten this, since production is not financed by a big checking account, but by investment. I, of course, will be sitting pretty, because Bollywood apparently has better storytelling than Hollywood. I can't really tell, because I can't understand what anyone is saying, but the musical numbers are pretty cool.

Posted by Joe Tommassello (Member # 4632) on 10-13-2008, 02:33 PM:

Galen:

Glancing over Tim Burton's IMDB page I can comfortably state that I think every film on it since (and including) Pee Wee's Big Adventure was at the least an entertaining ride with the exception of one...Planet of the Apes. I suggest you check out anything you haven't seen from that list...especially Ed Wood.

I heartily agree there are too many screens and not enough quality product. It kind of goes back to our IJ4 debate when I was saying that home video has altered the movie business forever and not in a good way. The days of the 600 seat single theater playing a hit movie to well-sold houses for six months at a time are long gone. Movies seemed to be fewer and of better quality then with "junk" being restricted primarily to drive-ins and grindhouses.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 10-13-2008, 05:49 PM:

quote: Joe Tommassello
The days of the 600 seat single theater playing a hit movie to well-sold houses for six months at a time are long gone.

Well of course they are, but it's not the movies' fault. The majority of the movies were bad long before the age of the multiplex.

Posted by Joe Tommassello (Member # 4632) on 10-13-2008, 06:02 PM:

quote:
quote: Joe Tommassello
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The days of the 600 seat single theater playing a hit movie to well-sold houses for six months at a time are long gone.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well of course they are, but it's not the movies' fault. The majority of the movies were bad long before the age of the multiplex.

Like I said Mike...it was home video (and related technologies) that poisoned the movie industry. Remember Disney releasing their classic films something like every nine years. Every time it was a big deal. Every time it made money because there was a new generation of moviegoers - and as parents we wanted to "share the magic" with our own demon spawn! It was genius. Today it's impossible. Where is the 70mm release of Sleeping Beauty like in '79? It's on DVD...that's where it is! Let me suggest that if there was no "home theater" technology as we have today and Steve and George had the first three IJ films in the can and not seen ANYWHERE for the past ten years they wouldn't have had to rape Indy on South Park last week (disturbing show)...they could have made more money just re-releasing the other films. Home video sucks! Now I have to go...I am watching a disc I got from Netflix tonight!