engagutt_henrik

The fifth installment of the Pirates-series is by all means a step up from the fourth. In all film-series, when a sequel is released it's mandatory to compare it to the best one - which in this case arguably everyone agrees is the first one. That may be unfair, but it's the reality. Now.

Pirates of the Caribbean: Salazar's Revenge does give us some spectacular moments. The visual effects really is astonishing, and some of the scenes is beyond anything I have ever seen before. That's impressing. But that's not why I like Pirates of the Caribbean. What I expect (hope) from a Pirates-film is elegant and witty dialog, compelling sea- battles and Jack Sparrow on fire. And this last bit I think is the biggest reason why this one fails to deliver.

In my opinion, Johnny Depp has lost his way as captain Jack. And I think that's natural, after all, it's been 13 years since he first portrait the character. He's gotten older and that really shows. This, combined with a really poor script, regarding Jack at least, makes it all fall apart. Half the time he's completely drunk (really drunk, not just usual Jack-tipsy) and half the time he tells bad jokes which really is beneath a genius character like Jack Sparrow.

The film starts on a positive note. I had good hopes that it could go somewhere, but mid- way through the story starts to split up and it didn't really have a good rhythm to it. In addition I think there are a lot of characters that just don't do anything to the story or adds humor or dynamic.

The decision to bring back Orlando Bloom to play Will Turner is fundamentally a good one, but I'm so disappointed with he's involvement in the film. It seems Disney only took him back to promote the film and lure old fans back for more. If he's to be involved, he should have a major role.

Javier Bardem does a good job as villain, but nothing I will remember him by.

All in all, I would say that I am disappointed. I didn't have huge expectations to begin with, but where I thought the film would deliver, it just didn't. Basically it's a film for the technical wizards to show how much they can do in terms of visual effects , and they can do a lot. It's just not what I want.

I admit it, I'm not very fund of all these superhero-movies they make these days. There are some exceptions though: films like The Dark Night (2008), Spiderman and Tim Burtons Batman I very much enjoyed. This one I didn't.

For starters I think one should be skeptical to titles with "vs" in it. To me it sounds somewhat cheap or amateurish. This shouldn't really matter, but it's after all the movie title. Come up with something a little more original.

In my opinion the story isn't very much intriguing. How many times haven't we seen the young Bruce Wayne lose his parents in the back alley behind the movie theatre? Or his never ending fall down the hole in the ground facing a million bats on the bottom. Again, the originality. Not to mention Batman and Superman's sudden realization that they need to work together to defeat the evil. Sound awfully familiar.

It seems to me that this film is just a show of from the wizards of visual effects. They have very much focused on the technical aspect of movie-making - with some brilliant slow motion scenes, but halfway through it kind of got a little ridiculous. A non stop bag of huge explosions and intense gunfire was a bit over the top for me, to say the least. Thank god I don't suffer from epilepsy. I would have been in trouble.

Taking all this into consideration this may just be perfect for the fans - and good for them. But for an "outsider" like my self it was a highly tiresome affair.

4/10

This well-acted film tells us the complex and troubled story of Steve Jobs and his turbulent road to success. The film may seem a bit slow, with lots and lots of dialogue, which there are, but that did not bother me at all.

Danny Boyle did a very good job connecting Jobs' different disputes or arguments he had with certain people in the past to the present events in the film. We get to see how important it was for Jobs to achieve what he wanted to, and for him to succeed other had to suffer. Michael Fassbender portrays Jobs as a very cold and arrogant person, and makes it very believable. He shows us why he got his second Academy Awards nomination for this role, and I surely wouldn't be surprised if he came out on top.

The credit should also go out to the supporting actors who did a very fine job as well. Seth Rogen, Kate Winslet and especially Jeff Daniels. He plays John Sculley, the president of Apple Inc at the time. He brings so much dynamic and friction to this film and made the entire experience very memorable. He is such an underrated actor and for me he deserved the Oscar nod for best supporting actor over Kate Winslet - though Winslet did a very good job as Joanna Hoffman; the marketing executive of Apple Inc.

You really feel for the people around Steve Jobs. They've got to handle his big personality and ,for lack of a better word, "I'm better than you"-attitude. Everyone gets their chance to rant at Jobs, seemingly unaffected up until his own daughter has had enough.

8 out of 10 - a very good film. Smart. Intense. You may even shed a tear. I didn't though... OK, did.