I watched it tonight for the first time - I've listened to Debeny's score before, and in my book a good score usually meant a good movie. So I thought I'd take out the DVD and watch the movie. Here where I knew that my book would have to be rewritten. I can definitely see why this sank the Carolco ship.
1) Everyone is miscast. I have never seen a movie with worse casting than this - Davis doesn't look/sound/act like a pirate. The scene where she climbs over the rock after the jump is fantastic for obvious reasons, but she still doesn't cut it as a pirate. The question of believability is not that of "can a woman be a pirate captain" but rather "how can this woman be a pirate captain?" And there could have been many answers "she is like a mother to them" or "they are all in love with her" or "she is a b-tch from hell and they are scared of her", or a combination of the above. Unfortunately, the movie gives us no credible answer, and neither does Davis' performance. Modine is trying to be what Matthew McConaughey would have become a few years later. Problem is - he is no McConaughey, although he is trying really hard. Langella doesn't look or act like a pirate - he seems to be more of an army major at a boot camp. At some stage I almost expected him to check his wrist for a watch and shout "You have 40 seconds, now move it soldiers!" Stan Shaw's role is probably supposed to be comic relief. Otherwise, I can't understand the idea with the ridiculous Jamaican accent. Unfortunately, there is nothing funny about his role or his delivery, so the joke becomes on him. Even the extras are miscast! During a flyover scene of the ship you can clearly see the actors struggling to climb down the Jacob's ladders - was it really that hard to find actors who could manage it a bit better?
2) The dialogue and realism. This is a PIRATE movie. They are supposed to use naval terms. Their speech is supposed to be peppered with swearing. It doesn't have to be R-rated, because there are ways to stylise speech without degrading it with F-words, but the dialogue in CTI was not stylised at all - it just sounded like a bunch of people talking on a morning train on the way to work. This, however, is a minor problem, compared to the overall level of dialogue, interactions and humour in this film. From the balls jokes to "wash your mouth" to the final "I want to see you in my quarters", it was just cringe-worthy.
3) Action sequences. Could someone in this crew do a bit of research? What canon balls were used for battles, how enemy ships were boarded, what a sailing ship looks like in battle, for heaven's sake? Why is a ship intact after a broadside-to=broadside battle? Why are the masts still standing? Honestly, I am not a navy historian, but for anyone who read C.S.Forrester as a child these scenes are mind boggling. And don't get me started with the "Why's?" on the final duel - that scene is just below criticism. Then there is the lack of blood. For some reason the director decided that it's OK to have blood and injuries that the protagonists suffer, but there should be no blood in battles. That's fine, but then the battles should be choreographed in a way that doesn't require blood. Instead, we see close-ups of people getting stabbed through with sabers, only to see a perfect clean blade when it is pulled out. In some instances the movie doesn't even try to make the impression - you see people getting "killed" by getting slapped on their backs with sabers. Production values, anyone?
Finally, I feel sorry for John Debney. He composed a wonderful score for a movie bad beyond salvation. If only this score would have been used for Pirates of the Caribbean instead of that awful stuff by Trevor Rabin it would have been so much more fitting a good score and a good movie. And I wouldn't have had to rewrite the rules in my book.
Bottom line - 3/10. 1 for the score, 1 for the Geena Davis scene after the jump and 1 for the monkey.
1) Everyone is miscast. I have never seen a movie with worse casting than this - Davis doesn't look/sound/act like a pirate. The scene where she climbs over the rock after the jump is fantastic for obvious reasons, but she still doesn't cut it as a pirate. The question of believability is not that of "can a woman be a pirate captain" but rather "how can this woman be a pirate captain?" And there could have been many answers "she is like a mother to them" or "they are all in love with her" or "she is a b-tch from hell and they are scared of her", or a combination of the above. Unfortunately, the movie gives us no credible answer, and neither does Davis' performance. Modine is trying to be what Matthew McConaughey would have become a few years later. Problem is - he is no McConaughey, although he is trying really hard. Langella doesn't look or act like a pirate - he seems to be more of an army major at a boot camp. At some stage I almost expected him to check his wrist for a watch and shout "You have 40 seconds, now move it soldiers!" Stan Shaw's role is probably supposed to be comic relief. Otherwise, I can't understand the idea with the ridiculous Jamaican accent. Unfortunately, there is nothing funny about his role or his delivery, so the joke becomes on him. Even the extras are miscast! During a flyover scene of the ship you can clearly see the actors struggling to climb down the Jacob's ladders - was it really that hard to find actors who could manage it a bit better?
2) The dialogue and realism. This is a PIRATE movie. They are supposed to use naval terms. Their speech is supposed to be peppered with swearing. It doesn't have to be R-rated, because there are ways to stylise speech without degrading it with F-words, but the dialogue in CTI was not stylised at all - it just sounded like a bunch of people talking on a morning train on the way to work. This, however, is a minor problem, compared to the overall level of dialogue, interactions and humour in this film. From the balls jokes to "wash your mouth" to the final "I want to see you in my quarters", it was just cringe-worthy.
3) Action sequences. Could someone in this crew do a bit of research? What canon balls were used for battles, how enemy ships were boarded, what a sailing ship looks like in battle, for heaven's sake? Why is a ship intact after a broadside-to=broadside battle? Why are the masts still standing? Honestly, I am not a navy historian, but for anyone who read C.S.Forrester as a child these scenes are mind boggling. And don't get me started with the "Why's?" on the final duel - that scene is just below criticism. Then there is the lack of blood. For some reason the director decided that it's OK to have blood and injuries that the protagonists suffer, but there should be no blood in battles. That's fine, but then the battles should be choreographed in a way that doesn't require blood. Instead, we see close-ups of people getting stabbed through with sabers, only to see a perfect clean blade when it is pulled out. In some instances the movie doesn't even try to make the impression - you see people getting "killed" by getting slapped on their backs with sabers. Production values, anyone?
Finally, I feel sorry for John Debney. He composed a wonderful score for a movie bad beyond salvation. If only this score would have been used for Pirates of the Caribbean instead of that awful stuff by Trevor Rabin it would have been so much more fitting a good score and a good movie. And I wouldn't have had to rewrite the rules in my book.
Bottom line - 3/10. 1 for the score, 1 for the Geena Davis scene after the jump and 1 for the monkey.