Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I get really annoyed when people laugh at me/us and say that I'm/we're looking to deep into things...things that "may not be there."

Well all I can do is laugh at you people and your ignorance towards how deep films can be. I'm sorry but Its just how I feel about the whole situation. Please don't criticise what you don't understand, Its really annoying to someone who has studied movies for 3 years at college and how deep movies do tend to get, to be made out to be someone has a passion for something "pointless" because "Ted and Terry don't think that deep"

..All I can do is laugh at that statement..I think Ted and terry would laugh at that statement too. If I'm right they are directors/writers because they studied movies in college/university like I did..and so they learned how important deeper meaning is to movies..They must have learned how important symbolism and auteurism is to a successful movie.

( Definition of "Auteurism" - a filmmaker whose individual style and complete control over all elements of production give a film its personal and unique stamp.)

before I studied movies at college. I was once very unaware of all the symbolisms and double meanings crammed into most movies, for example the 6th sense. I watched it then listened to the directors commentary and was astonished at how many things flew over my head..TONNES of symbolic things. American beauty is another. Heck even back to the future did it..as did Indiana Jones.

Now PotC is a blockbuster yes..but that doesn't mean the movie is lacking in standard when it comes to how artistic the writers/directors are. Movies ARE an art form and what set PotC 1 apart from so many other blockbuster movies of 2003 was the fact it is very much its own movie. It may be a blockbuster but the director/writers obviously have their own creative control over what they want in there(little character called Jack Sparrow for instance)...It was a risk and it worked well. Very much like a independent movie is a risk and they sometimes work very well because of how deep they come across.

Ted and Terry/Gore tend not to discuss the symbolic things they add into their movies. I'm guessing this is because they like to keep US guessing. Ted kinda has said on KttC..that they like us to discuss everything we see with the movie.

it IS more fun that way.

Also DMC has crossed over to a new audience as well as its original fanbase the audience has become a broader audience. Its different to CotBP the movie is MUCH more adult so it needs to have deeper meaning in it to attract a larger fanbase..and it HAS. For example the millions of sexual innuendos introduced which were not there in movie 1 (well not so many ayway )

I'm not saying what we say with our theories and studies of this movie are 100 % ..but much of what we spot is probably quite significant and symbolic in one way or another..It just depens on if we HAVE actually interpreted the symbolic meaning of a certain scene/line correctly or not.

But its not the best film ever

thats a matter of opinion^^

it IS a matter of opinion..it's just a matter of seeing if the movie connected with you or not...if it did that you will probably think it deserves at least 3 oscar nominations..if it didn't you'll watch it once go "ok that was nice" but you'll never see /think about it again. that happens with a lot of films just because I didn't like star wars THAT much it doesn't mean it wasn't the best movie EVER! probably was in most aspects..for most people. but it just didn't connect with me. LovelyOne I think you made a perfect point some things you notice...or I do or any other member of this forum does might be so faint as if it's not even there but the fact is that it IS there...in a film they don't put things in lightly! not even the little details...did you know in pirates 1...the scene with the canon blowing up actually showed a micky mouse head? how FAINT is THAT? but it was there non the less...that has to prove SOMETHING

Okay, LovelyOne, you have a point and everyone you're talking about has a point. I love reading your posts because they make me think about what I've seen, but the great thing about film and all art is that it doesn't matter in the long run what the arist/writer had in mind when they created it. What matters is what the viewer/reader takes away from it.
Let's say it's 100% truth that the writers put in everything they did for the reasons you say they did. If someone sees something else, should they be scolded for that? When I belonged to a Phantom of the Opera board, a girl had whole threads disecting scenes to prove the story is an allegory and essentially Christine does choose the Phantom. I didn't agree with her, but it was so interesting to read someone else's point of view about a movie I liked so well.
Your theories, while I agree with most of them, made me look a little deeper into the series and I sincerely appreciate that. Your thoughts are valued here, but so do the thoughts of everyone else. Remember, a movie is only successful if it means things to a lot of people, and POTC has done that. As long as it does that, it doesn't matter what those things are.

No I'm not bothered about difference in opinion in the movie and how people feel about different hints ..Thats not what I'm getting at. I said I'm not saying I am right with my theories

Whats pissing me off his how people ignorant to the Study of Film basically imply that my whole line of interest is "pointless" because I "delve too deeply into things"..Maybe they should go and tell that Ted/Terry and Gore because in the past they have had to study exactly the same things as I have in university and college in order for PotC to even make it onto the big screen in the first place.

If they diss my line of interest then they are dissing Ted and Terry's line of interest...they are be-littling my whole passion and way of life...and in doing so they are dissing Ted and Terry's passion and way of life also the very movie they love....hypocrites.

Originally posted by LovelyOne
No I'm not bothered about difference in opinion in the movie and how people feel about it.

.what pissing me off his how people ignorant to the Study of Film basically imply that my whole line of interest is "pointless" because I delve too deeply into things..maybe they should go and tell Ted/erry and gore the same thing because they had to study everything I have
lol that was funny cause gore and T&T DID have to study all those things as well...and I agree with you it's ok if somebody doesn't AGREE with those points but to say they're POINTLESS? that's mean and not true..cause you know: a small piece of paper or a heart symbol or a snake in the back ground or whatever else that is THERE isn't so important to someone who is just watching the movie cause they think "well it's just THERE...just so the scne isn't empty" but to someone who is studying the film it's important cause they think "well they could've just put anything else there instead of that heart locket...why did gore choose a heart? does it have anything to do with the heart on the chest or...."

OK something else is pissing me the hell off now.

I DO NOT LOOK INTO THINGS TOO DEEPLY I am a ****ing film studies student so I only EVER make a theory based on something I feel is solid and in our face..(yes I made the thing about the heart in the background but that was a JOKE)..I dont just look and imagine things for ****s sake..I'm not looking for things to back up J/E I'm looking at things which Back up Jack's and Elizabeth's arcs I'm trying to break down the story and understand what is going on with each character

Pay no mind, those people, they don't know what they are talking about. They are just trying to find excuses, they know and they are totally aware of all the scenes in the movie. They are just like Liz's character, in total denial they just can't accept it. Let them write whatever they want, we'll just come back with more kick ass facts and squashed the heck out of them

Easy there lovelyone! You have to keep in mind that not every one goes to college, that not every one has the time to take a film studies class, or even has the time to really take a look at the characters. (Though if you're in college and you haven't taken a class related to film and literature, I suggest you do so. It will change the way you view movies.)
Also, you have to keep in mind that interpretation is open ended. No two people can look at the same scene in the same way. Ted and Terry wrote the triangle with that in mind. They've said as much in their interviews. There are two different ways to look at the story. There is story logic, the plain and simple plot lines, and then there is the emotional logic.

I like to think of two opposing interpretations as the difference between Jack and Will. As a character, Will tends to see things only as they are on the surface. He doesn't ask questions. A man like Jack is scoundrel, no good, smelly pirate who is undeserving of Elizabeth's affection. (Sound familiar? Certain, although not all members of KTTC) It's not a matter of their criticizing you, or necessarily being wrong. From a strictly matter of fact point of view--they're right.

Don't take it personally if they can't see the same way that you do.
Meanwhile, Jack evaluates the world with a different moral landscape. He sees life with shades of grey. That people are not so one dimensional, that there can be different types of evil, and good. That a pirate can still be a pirate and a good man--He knows how to interpret actions and how to twist words so that the same sentence can have quite a few different meangings...


You have a different lense on which to view the movie because you've had the advantage of studying film. Keep in mind that a lot of people few film purely from an entertainment standpoint. They don't understand that while yes, it's entertainment, it's also an art form, and that yes, writers, directors, all of them work together to give anything they work on a deeper meaning. So take it all with a little perspective. Keep your chin up and keep writing! The best step in fighting ignorance is information, and you're doing a great job of teaching what you know about film.

I know I guess you are right but.it just itrritates me is when someone basically implies my whole line of interest is a waste of time.. As in I look too deeply into things..Well thats what I have to study at college and into uni. So one day I hope be able to break into that line of work...I would like to see these people who say I look too deeply in to PotC try to get into that line of work to write/direct a movie..they wouldnt get a chance in hell to write/direct a movie if they overlooked the importance of symbolism and deeper meaning in a movie..its one of the key apects to a successful movie.

Ted/Terry/Gore had to study the same way I do too in order to even become directors/script writers in the first place, People need to rekmemeber that..so the stuff I'm picking up on under the surface isnt lots of meaningless crap..It probably does have meaning in there

..so people who think I'm looking too deep need to realise that its what the whole movie making business is about. Taking films like an art form. Ted/Terry and gore all know this because they were probably taught in a similar way I was about the ins and outs of movies.

They just lke to make me feel stupid for looking "too deep" well thats BS any person who wants to take film as a job etc when they get older needs to learn about flilms and deeper meaning in college/uni like I do.

Its like being a makeup artist and I say to someone who's studying to become one.."you put too much effort into applying the makeup"

well yo HAVE to if you want to become a successful makeup artist dont you?

Lovely ...I've never had film studies...I'm college graduate...but never studied films and stuff...all my ideas and theories and keying in on all the clues comes from just loving the movie..and being so captivated by the chemistry between Jack and Liz...and some have come from reading things you write. But your theories that go deeper help me to pick up the underlying meanings that aren't smacking us in the face. Like your heart theory and Elizabeth, the hat Theory and Jack and the dog and how he symbolizes Jack...
But the surface stuff... that's easy to see and if pple don't see it...it's because they don't want to. I mean there is no denying that when Liz held the compass on two specific occasions it pointed to Jack. On both of those occassions she is frustrated because she knows it's pointing to Jack. It's not hidden that Beckett points out to us that the wedding hasn't been merely interrupted...FATE Intervened.....It's no mistake that Norrington walks up to ELizabeth and says "It's a curious thing. There was a time when I would have given anything for you to look like that when thinking about me. (HE is refering to her thinking about Jack, here folks. She has a giddy, school-girl smile on her face, she is biting her lip thinking all about how she might "persuade Jack" and quite enjoying those thoughts..til she is rudely interrupted by Norrie)
Norrington looking at her and then Jack and rolling his eyes with that "oh Please" look on his face when Lizzie throws her little tantrum on the beach about the compass not working...Norrie knows that once again that compass has pointed to dear ol' Jack.
Jack rowing away in the longboat. The compass finally works for him at this point (although it may have worked for him on the island...when he looked at it...it pointed to Liz and the chest at the same time cuz she was sitting on it - the compass has not worked for Jack the entire movie...he needed Liz to help him find the chest...cuz the compass wasn't helping Jack..all of a sudden in works on the beach and WHY?...cuz Liz is there...).....he returns to the Pearl in hero fashion...Liz clings to his leg while he fires the rifle..instead of going down to check on Brave William....who has just taken a hard fall onto the deck of the Pearl....then The Kiss....ya know if she was doing this out of pure hatred - then she would have chained him, spat in his face and said "good riddance, Jack. This is payback for all the times you've tricked me, etc."...No, what does she do...she stays face to face, nose to nose, breath to breath, mouth to mouth with him...she almost takes a second kiss and Jack would've let her. He is smiling at her and that final word to her "Pirate!"....

LOvely, you are not crazy, you are not wasting your time...cuz if you are then a whole slew of us are.

Thanks Lovethemtigers. I agree with every word you say. Basically whats hapened is we saw the face stuff then people..the W/E shippers are the ones who are looking deeper saying "oh not it was pointing to Will through Jack" or Will was behind the sand une the whole time when the compass pointed there"

I'm sorry but that is the stupidest thing I have ever heard..Symbolic things in a movie are pretty straight forward...they are not placed there to confuse us, they are placed there to show us what dialogue and mere actions CANT they are there to show us the theme raised in the movie..and the bloody theme is she wants to SAVE will the most but she wants JACK the most..that is the "thematic argument" ted and Terry said was raised in the movie..they said ARGUMENT..meaning there are two opposing themes with each character..and in the end with Elizabeth, the Jack one won over NOT the Will one at the end of DMC

Secondly critics and loads of people seem to think that the canibal Island scene was a waste of time..no it wasnt because that was to show you the dog..thats the whole point of that scene IMO and it went over so many peoples heads..the dog is mirroring Jack. He's basically telling us whats going on with the character of Jack later on in the movie cuz Jack on the surface is not one to show or speak about his emotions.

sorry I'm not yelling at you tigers I'm yelling at the irritating w./E shippers who are the ones who look far too deep when it comes to the straight forward Jack/Liz hints in the movie.

So the answer to the thematic argument raised with Elizabeth at the end of DMC which is..She wants Will and she wants Jack..but she wants each man in a different way.

She clearly wants to save Will the most in the world..but in the end thats all there is, there is then an emptiness..Will is safe and with her then she feels empty, She's not complete, all she wants is Jack Sparrow which is what the ****ing compass was telling her all along. She actually decideds to give up a happy ending with Will in order to find Jack again before the movie closes..that's the last choice she makes before the movie closes..and as T&T say "all the closure for the characters is at the end of DMC itself"

I know you weren't yelling at me..I was just supporting you..and us....

I had another thought today....okay...in the Curiosity scene:
They have just finished the mar-ri-age scene...Jack has suggested they could get married...then she says no thank you...

Jack : Why not, we are very much alike, you and I, I-you, us
Liz: Oh, except for a sense of honor, and decency and, and a moral center and Personal Hygiene....

Okay so at the end of DMC...Jack has proven to her three of those four things are no longer standing between them...he's proven he has honor, he has decency and he does have a moral center.....so the only thing is the personal hygiene...so once he has that bath in AWE (LOL)...he'll be all cleaned up and then her last reason for protest will be gone...then what is Liz going to do?????

Just a funny thought...

yeah I was thinking that..its like after everything was discussed in that scene..she almost kissed him..she was ready to kiss him lol

Yeah...she definitely wanted to kiss him....no one can tell me that look on her face was anything but disappointment when she says "I'm proud of you Jack" and she looks longingly at his lips.....

I think she was proud of him somewhat, but still dissappointed that he didnt kiss her and less have a taste of him.

I dont think she was proud of him at all there for pulling away..she was lying..everything she was saying to him contradicted what she was trying to do..she was lying about what she was really doing and how she really feels

Jack does the same thing when he's trying to hide his emotions or is trying to get something from someone..he lies and blabs on and on like she was there.

She just wanted to make her look herself all innocent so Jack could be the evil dude who kisses her not the other way around.

I just wanted to say that LovelyOne was the one that made me really question the relationship between Jack and Liz because when I first joined the board, I had no idea what to think or what direction the story should go, even what I wanted to have happen. And then I read LovelyOne's theories, and they do mean something to me. It was a new way of thinking and I read them and thought about them and I happen to agree with her that Jack/Liz is the best way to conclude the story and develop the characters. So, LovelyOne, I like our little discussions and debates and if no one else does, just send me private messages and we'll agree and disagree till we can do so no longer, savvy?

well we can do it here that way we can all add alittle something and each add an opinion or a theory.