Drive

Drive Poster Rating: ★★★★½

One scene that defines the stylish and disciplined vigor of “Drive” transpires inside a slim, narrow elevator. Our heroes enter the elevator; the doors slam shut. By the time they open again, we have been taken through a hint of suspense, a moment of intimacy, and finally, a burst of ultra-violence. That the movie was able to depict and contain three different moods in a limited space and time astounds me.  This is the rare kind of movie that fully values its existence, using every second of its running time for its benefit.

“Drive” stars Ryan Gosling, the Oscar-nominated actor who was given more international appreciation in his previous work as Jacob Palmer in “Crazy, Stupid, Love”. Here, a name eludes him as promotions only refer to his character as “Driver”. The inquisitive effect of a screen name like Driver reminds us of Edward Norton’s character in Fight Club, who was only identified in the credits as “Narrator”. Both evoke the same aura of ambiguity, although the Gosling character is more subtle and composed.

Carey Mulligan and Ryan GoslingDriver’s professional and personal life is centered around cars. He occupies the role of a stunt driver for the movies. He also works as a mechanic, fixing cars when he’s not flipping them on set. Beyond that, he also participates in robberies by agreeing to be the getaway driver. Driving seems to keep Driver occupied. He hardly ever speaks. Ask him a question, and his words halt after the answer is given. There are not more than two instances in the entire film where he speaks three sentences in a row. His quiet nature strays away from conventional personalities and takes us to a person so perplexing, even his fellow characters join the audience in trying to understand him.

Driver doesn’t fit the profile of the commercial action hero. He doesn’t have a sense of humor, nor does he fancy fashion and attention. He isn’t decorated like The Transporter or every other Dwayne Johnson character ever. He has his own issues with the law. Sure, the movie features a pretty girl for him to fall in love with, but this is not to give him a love interest, but a motivation.  He doesn’t try to be a hero, but the circumstances give him the opportunity to act like one.

The physical intensity that may seem to be hiding within the Gosling character is made up for by the exceedingly elegant style of Danish director Nicolas Winding Refn. The brilliant opening sequence tells us that Refn is uninfluenced by the works of the majority. We see Driver in a car chase with the cops, but Refn treats the dark streets as a puzzle for suspense rather than a playground of destruction. Driver makes use of streetlights, blind spots and empty corners as a way to outsmart his opponents. Michael Bay will be disappointed by the absence of explosions.

Ryan Gosling as DriverCarey Mulligan also stars as Irene, a lonely mother waiting for her husband to return home from prison. Driver, who shares the same apartment building, feels her solitude. He keeps her company, but conversations are occasional. The movie invests in their relationship in a way that the plot doesn’t set in until the half hour mark. Driver’s secret life results into serious trouble with some powerful, cruel men. He intends to keep Irene as safe as possible.

To call “Drive” an action movie would not do it justice. It’s not just about cars getting smashed. Not a lot of action movies are praised for its moments of silence. I like it when emotions and stories are told through stares, moods, and music. When Driver realizes that he might not be able to return, he calls Irene, and tells her how he feels. Simple words, but we sense its weight because those words came from a guy who hardly ever speaks three sentences in a row.

Hanna

Hanna PosterRating: ★★★★½

I viewed “Hanna” with a mild curiosity. It feels that it started out as an average revenge thriller that was later enhanced by above average talents. The cast and crew of this film did more for the story that it could have asked of them. Sure, a lot of shooting and chasing goes around, but you can sense an evidence of planning and patience within them. The creators of “Hanna” operated with a vision of an audience with an attention span slightly longer than that of others.

The film opens somewhere near the Arctic Circle. A teenage girl, named Hanna (Saoirse Ronan), has just killed a deer with an arrow, followed by a bullet. She drags the carcass of the animal through the deep, icy snow to a cabin in the woods where her father, Erik (Eric Bana), is waiting for her. Not the best conditions for a teenage girl, I’m sure. We learn that father and daughter have been in this place since Hanna was still an infant. She has been homeschooled all her life. And because Erik is a wanted CIA agent, he forms Hanna into the perfect assassin.

Not everyone gets to master martial arts and firearms at that early age, and the secluded home of Hanna offers little distractions. But, this lifestyle is not without disadvantages. Except for her own father, Hanna has not known any other person. Her books tell her that the world contains so much, and she knows that she is a stranger to almost all of them. That is probably why she was more than eager to find out that her mission will require her to travel in order to eliminate lots of bad guys, including a secretive CIA officer, Marissa Wiegler (Cate Blanchett).

Hanna

“Hanna” is less about a plot to assassinate a group of government officials and more about a young girl’s opportunity to discover what it’s like to have a normal life. It’s an interesting and amusing sight to see a girl who has as much awkwardness in her as there is violence. For Hanna, escaping maximum security and assassinating countless of men is the easy part. One of her biggest challenges involves a loud TV and a remote control that she cannot quite understand. Maybe this is why it’s possible for me to like a killer like Hanna and despise a killer like Hitgirl from “Kick-Ass”. Hitgirl is merely identified as a weapon; Hanna is treated like a person.

Saoirse Ronan agreeing to play Hanna is a good sign. Most actresses who started out young in Hollywood usually stray away from good movies as they get older. (What was Lindsay Lohan’s next great starring role after “Mean Girls”?) Saoirse is in the right direction, who always looks for roles that would expand her abilities in acting. Did you know that she was nominated for an Oscar at age thirteen? This girl is a gem, and also, the second prettiest girl my eyes have ever seen.

Saoirse Ronan

The care given to the development of the characters is extended towards the action sequences. Most action sequences of recent years, which are especially true to 2011, are composed of nothing but bits of frames spliced and edited back together in order to form something… anything… that resembles movement. Directors who resolve to quick cuts are either lazy of their work or uninformed of their craft. The director here is Joe Wright, who is known for his long, continuous, and uninterrupted shots. This is the first time he has done an action picture, and has already proven himself more competent with the genre than someone like Paul W. S. Anderson. Wright’s steady direction, accompanied by a magnetic soundtrack by The Chemic Brothers, is a pleasure for both the eyes and the ears.

“Hanna” is a great film and a fine example of filmmaking. Because action films are more familiar with the public, my hope is that many people will see it, and be astonished by its superiority. My honest hope is that this will cause them to raise their standards, and start looking for more of its kind. People who take serious time to defend something like “Transformers: Dark of the Moon” only tells me that they haven’t seen anything better than it.

We have a long way to go, dear reader. Did you know that “Hanna”, an action picture, was not even released here in my country? I’m starting to think that the Philippines has a grudge against good movies. Or maybe it just doesn’t know what a good movie looks like.

NOTE: Oh, glorious joy! My prayers have been answered! “Hanna”, which was originally denied a June release date here in the Philippines, will be granted a much delayed September 28 release. Even though this is a little too late for me, since I have already seen the film, I celebrate. I can now move on to my next prayer: “May the disgusting, delusional Metro Manila Film Festival be cancelled this year, so theaters can make way for Better Movies.” It doesn’t take an intelligent explanation why I’d rather watch the latest films of Spielberg and Scorsese than the 12th, or is it 13th, “Shake Rattle & Roll” film.

UPDATE (11/14/11): “Hanna” was also denied of the September release date, adding it to the pile of good movies that never made it to the Philippines.

Drive Angry

Drive Angry PosterRating: ★☆☆☆☆

“Drive Angry” is a grindhouse movie about fast cars, killer coins, mutilated bodies, bullet holes, bad accents, human sacrifices, Satan, Satan’s worshippers, Satan’s Accountant, and a few conversations about slitting the throat of an infant so Hell could move up to Earth and party. Find anything that could offend you?

The star is Nicolas Cage. His choice of movies in recent years has been, questionable. Either he’s been testing the range of his acting skills, or he’s only been agreeing to do certain movies that require him to have a weird haircut. That man’s hair has had more alterations than a teenager. After “Season of the Witch” and “Drive Angry”, it’s now safe to say that Mr. Cage needs to hire a new stylist as much as he needs to hire a new agent. Anyway.

Cage plays a dead, angry, blonde man named John Milton. Don’t ask. His daughter has been brutally murdered by a satanic cult, and plans to execute her baby while they drink beer. Milton, who is in Hell, is not happy. (And that’s not just because he’s in Hell.) Pissed off and ready to kick some living ass, he steals Satan’s special gun and makes his way back to earth in a car. (It’s probably Satan’s, too.) His actions are constantly monitored by the Accountant, who is the film’s most interesting aspect. Abstrusely played by William Fichtner, the Accountant, fresh from the Underworld, is a silent, well-dressed assassin with physical abilities beyond human. So, in short, he is The Terminator from Hell.

John Milton

Conscious of its absurdity and proud of its vulgarity, the audience of “Drive Angry” will not extend very far. People who receive crass madness as entertainment will be the majority of its fans. I can’t say I liked the movie, though I also can’t say that I don’t like grindhouse movies in general. I kinda enjoyed “Machete”. There was a funny irony in the roles of Steven Seagal and Lindsay Lohan. And it was… engaging, if that’s the word, to see Danny Trejo play a character that feels destined for him.

I don’t see any irony and satisfaction in Nicolas Cage’s streak of bad movies. The man has proved to us that he can act in 2009’s “The Bad Lieutenant”, which was a great movie. Why participate in a movie called “Drive Angry” when you can know you’re good enough to be in a Werner Herzog film?

Captain America: The First Avenger

Captain America PosterRating: ★★★½☆

The early 1940’s represents tough times. A horrible war is being fought, and Colonel Phillips (Tommy Lee Jones) strongly believes that sweet victory will be embraced by the side that places more confidence in men than in weapons.

The United States of America needs the best soldiers they can find, and in comes a young man with an unparalleled desire to serve his country. His name is Steve Rogers. He is an asthmatic and weighs less than a hundred pounds. If he’s also missing half a toenail, then he’d remind me of myself five years ago. At home, he is constantly bullied, bad-mouthed, and beaten up.

Steve may not have the muscles that are required for the ideal soldier, but he has the heart. Thankfully, Doctor Erskine (Stanley Tucci) sees the goodwill in Steve and offers him an opportunity no 90-pound asthmatic could resist. You see, the military has developed a special technology that, once inserted in the body, could permanently alter human cells and make you much meatier without having to go to the gym. Sounds like super steroids to me, but what the heck. Let’s continue.

Steve is buckled inside this chamber where the transformation is to take place. Teams of scientists operate it while military officers observe from a safe distance. One of them is the pretty Peggy Carter, someone who may have romantic feelings for Steve, and vice versa. Buttons are pushed, levers are pulled, and knobs are turned. The chamber is opened and out comes the new Steve Rogers. Why, he now looks exactly like Chris Evans! All of Steve has gotten bigger. This includes his pants because this movie is rated PG-13.

Steve Rogers

While Steve adjusts to his changes, Johann Schmidt, a Nazi officer, works on his evil schemes. We know he’s badass because he’s trying to outdo Hitler. His success is dependent upon a puzzling cube that possesses unlimited energy. Because of its immense powers, my guess is that it isn’t man-made, which is supported when Schmidt says that the item is “the prize of Odin’s treasure room”. And though that line of dialogue actually complicates the item’s identity even more, there’s a later sign that it will further be explained in connected films.

“Captain America: The First Avenger” is one of many comic book movies in 2011 that tells the origin of its heroes. This is the one that got it right the most. It is highly disciplined in how Director Joe Johnston was not distracted by the movie’s potential for action sequences. He shows great interest in the story. All of the characters are necessary for the plot’s advancement, unlike most of the young mutants in “X-Men: First Class”. The hero, Steve Rogers, has moments of sincere emotions, unlike Thor, who will be remembered more as an action figure. “Captain America: The First Avenger” strongly believes that sweet victory will be embraced by movies that place more confidence in story than in special effects.

 

Note: It’s rather frustrating how I missed around three minutes of the movie’s dialogue because the theater I was in had a defective sound system. I write this so you don’t have to experience such an unnecessary nuisance. The bad theater can be found in one of the SM Supermalls. The SM Supermalls can be found in the Philippines. (U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!)

The Mechanic (2011)

The Mechanic PosterRating: ★★½☆☆

“The Mechanic” is an entirely enjoyable action flick if you’ve only seen three or four other action movies, which is about equivalent to half a Michael Bay film. It considers the expectations of its audience. Guns are shot, stunts are pulled off, and cars are thrashed all over. But the real joy in movie-watching usually comes from the unexpected, which is a fact that this movie is either too lazy or too ignorant to recognize.

The film stars Jason Statham as Arthur Bishop. The more movies he makes, the more I question his versatility as an actor. Like many of his past roles, Statham plays a character who is a “professional” at his field. His line of work must be illegal, because it’s more fun that way. Would The Transporter’s story be as exciting as it is if Statham delivered pizzas instead of… “packages”?

However, Arthur Bishop doesn’t deliver any illegal packages. No. He is employed by a secret company that pays him to kill people who are frowned upon by society. Hm. Is this company actually doing the country a favor? During the start, the movie showed signs of a slightly interesting story. It was ready to ask: “Is it, ‘less wrong’, to commit murder if you do it to the bad guys?” But as it drew longer, it strayed far from that question and closer to the guns, stunts, and cars.

I’ve been dismissed by friends as a person who can’t appreciate action sequences. This can’t be true, for I’ve really liked both “Shoot ‘em Up” and last year’s “The A-Team.” I am grateful of long and loud action sequences that involve craftsmanship, context, and humor, which are things that none of “The Mechanic” possess. The choice of having Jason Statham as the star makes things worse. Not much is required of his roles in most of his films, yet he insists of repeadetdy portraying them.

Jason Statham

Most Statham characters must wear expensive clothes, have superhuman abilities, and speak in a guarded, monotone voice. When he does not speak, he simply must strike a pose and appear cool, which shouldn’t take much effort if you have the looks of Jason Statham. I’ve grown rather tired of seeing him in roles that only reminds us of his past ones.

What’s holding Statham back from leaving his comfort zone? Maybe it’s a fear of self-embarrassment? Yeah. That makes perfect sense. I mean, take a look at Dwayne Johnson. Unlike Mr. Statham, he tried out something totally different, and ended up playing The Tooth Fairy.

Transformers: Dark of the Moon

Transformers 3 PosterRating: Zero Stars

I spent almost two hours of my life waiting in line to buy a ticket for this darn movie. That was a much better experience than watching this darn movie. “Transformers: Dark of the Moon” is the worst American movie I have ever seen since I saw “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen.” Like murder and adultery, both movies have no right to exist.

For the third straight film, the Autobots and Decepticons are once again on a race for the possession of… something. The Autobots must find it before the Decepticons… or else. Let me ask you something. Does it really matter what they’re after? Would it make much of a difference if I told you they were fighting for a washing machine? Not really, because its only purpose is to provoke these robots to pound each other relentlessly until one of them lose their head. That last sentence might sound like the entire blueprint for “Dark of the Moon”, but I assure you that there’s actually a plot this time. *wink*

Before we get to that, I must first state the obvious fact that Megan Fox’s Mikaela has been replaced by Rosie Huntington-Whiteley’s Carly. Different characters, but both are just about as irrelevant. Now how can I describe Carly’s role in one sentence? We get a long and carefully planned shot at her panty-covered butt before we get to see her face.

Rosie Huntington-Whiteley

Anyway, the year is 1961, and a space ship has crash landed on the moon. The U.S. military has kept this information as a secret from all mankind. But when Optimus Prime learns about it, he rushes to the moon and finds the unconscious Sentinel Prime.

Meanwhile, Megatron has been hiding somewhere in Africa since the last movie ended. His head is missing a massive chunk, which might explain why he’s so grumpy all the time. I know what you’re thinking: “Why in the hell is Megatron hiding somewhere in Africa?” Maybe Michael Bay thinks that no one could ever possibly see him there? After all, he’s only a giant alien robot. Also, he’s wearing some sort of cape. We can’t really judge him for this fashion statement. Have you ever spent years under the hot sun preparing your next evil plan to conquer the universe while managing a splitting headache?

Anyway, Sam Witwicky (Shia LaBeouf) is trying to find a job. For about half an hour, we watch him reach for employment while his Mom releases a second joke in this franchise that involves Sam’s… penis. None of these feel important, you would think, if the universe is once again in danger, but Michael Bay disagrees. If this is his response to “too many explosions”, then all is lost.

Guns and Explosions

Soon, but not soon enough, Sam re-teams with the Autobots. In this reunion, he learns about Sentinel Prime, who is revived by Optimus. Thankfully, Sentinel speaks fluent English like all the other giant alien robots, and he explains to us that they must race for the possession of… pillars… which are eventually used by the Decepticons to summon lots of fellow Decepticons from the moon.

The final act of the movie features a climax so unendurably long, so unbearably agonizing, and so undeniably stupid, only a man of Michael Bay’s legacy would dare film it.

Hundreds of Decepticons have overtaken Chicago, and the central pillar that controls all the other pillars must be…? It is publicly displayed on top of a Chicago building, just waiting to be shot at. The ones assigned to take it down are a group of soldiers with a bazooka. Yes, a transformer could have easily destroyed it, but no worries. Our soldiers leap from helicopters and soar down the city through wingsuits. They use those wingsuits so well we wonder why they didn’t land close to the target. Oh well. They walk the rest of the way.

Yeah, the previous paragraph is a little unproductive, but at least we finally discover the weakness of almighty Optimus Prime: Steel Cables. Yes. Prime, who was so badass in the climax of the last movie, seems a little rusty here. He flies directly to a set of steel cables that were just, oh you know, hanging around. While Optimus literally rests in the clutches of those darn cables, a bombardment of inconceivable action sequences plague the screen.

It’s rather difficult to distinguish the bad robots from the good robots, especially during scenes when Carly’s cleavage dominates most of the framework. So, Michael Bay has invented an ingenious way for us to tell those robots apart. The Autobots are color-coded, while the Decepticons are always either grunting, salivating, or shooting at innocent civilians.

Shockwave and Pet

Am I forgetting something here? Oh yeah. One last thing: There’s also this Decepticon called Shockwave. What Shockwave does is that he commands an enormous, worm-like, drill-happy transformer while he stands still and tries to look threatening. We see him in an earlier scene before the hundreds of Decepticons arrive from the moon. The logical thing to assume here is that he was hiding, or resting, during the two movies that came before “Transformers: Dark of the Moon.” So where was he hiding? Not in Africa for sure. Megatron was there first.

I enjoyed the original “Transformers” for what it had to show. What I don’t understand is how we are asked to find enjoyment in a louder, longer, and dumber version of the same mechanical carnage. An auteur like Christopher Nolan and a newcomer like Duncan Jones show great trust in their audience by making movies that are both tremendously entertaining and intellectually challenging. Michael Bay forcefully and sloppily combines frames, scenes, and sometimes entire stories of incomprehensive randomness and just hopes that we’re stupid enough to miss his strokes of unforgettable idiocy. Michael Bay isn’t simply just a bad director. He’s quite an asshole, too.

The Green Hornet (Quick Review)

The Green Hornet Poster Rating: ★½☆☆☆

Seth Rogen plays an overly talkative, trash-talking man-child by day, and an overly talkative, trash-talking vigilante by night. The man will not shut up. “The Green Hornet” is less about the comic book character known as the The Green Hornet and more about Rogen’s pretentious and narcissistic love affair with himself. The supporting characters here only function as mere targets for Rogen’s self-glorifying cheap shots.

Think about the role he has prepared for the lovely Cameron Diaz. The woman has a certain charm that only a few actresses posses in Hollywood. Yet, she is only in this film so Rogen’s character can talk about how hot she is. I’m thinking that only someone like Megan Fox could actually feel pride in a pitiful role like this one.

Another person who shares the same misfortune as Ms. Diaz is the great Austrian-German actor, Christoph Waltz. His abilities here are so restricted that Rogen may have forgotten that Waltz has an Oscar. When we see Waltz appear on screen, we are only reminded of “Inglorious Basterds”, and we could just recall how brilliant that movie is while we wait for Seth Rogen to finish whatever the hell he’s trying to say.

The Expendables

Rating: ★☆☆☆☆

Sylvester Stallone. Jason Statham. Jet Li. Mickey Rourke. Terry Crews. Stone Cold Steve Austin. Bruce Willis. Arnold Schwarzenegger. Dear reader, though you would be wrong, it is not ignorant of you to assume that what I am about to review is the latest Old Spice commercial.

The names mentioned above are, in fact, the entire advertising campaign of “The Expendables.” In posters, in trailers, in interviews, that is all you hear mentioned, asked, and promoted. Never before in movie history has there been a bigger opportunity to fabricate the most epic action movie of all time. And never before has there been such a more embarrassing failure to seize such an opportunity.

The producers of “The Expendables” may have been so busy casting our action heroes that they ended up forgetting to hire a credible writer and director. But no worries, because good ‘ol Stallone himself has volunteered to fill those empty, very essential roles.

What must it have been like, I thought, to spend a full day in the making of “The Expendables.” Having seen the film, I visualize hours and hours spent setting up explosives, loading guns, and rehearsing fist fights. And if there was time to spare, maybe a few lines of script were written.

I must now state the observable reality that Mr. Stallone can neither direct nor write. He seems to struggle with scenes featuring more than two actors, and no guns. I fear the sequel will include more action stars, like Steven Seagal and Jean Claude Van Damme. But I assume that they won’t be available because they would be too busy continuing to dominate the video stores near you.

For all its faults, “The Expendables” does have its share of surprises. I confess that I did not expect to see the drastic effects of Botox in this film. We thought this display of denial was over after “Sex and the City 2”, but Stallone’s suspicious and unnatural smile begs to differ.

As I watched “The Expendables”, waiting for it to end, my thoughts can be squeezed into a single question: Why is this piece of junk enjoying the status of a summer blockbuster when it only deserves to be premiered on television? Finally, the movie ended, and the credits rolled, and I got the answer: Stallone. Statham. Li. Rourke. Crews. Austin. Willis. Schwarzenegger.

X-Men: First Class

Rating: ★★★☆☆

Remember the X-Men movie right before this one? You know, the one about the origins of Wolverine? I don’t. My guess is that Hugh Jackman doesn’t either. If he does, I can almost be sure that he’s at least trying. “X-Men: First Class”, directed by Matthew Vaughn, is a prequel that shows us how the presence of mutants became known to humans, and how they responded to each other’s impressions. This can also be identified as a 130-minute apology to “Wolverine.”

The film’s first minutes are located in a nasty Nazi prison camp. The mother of young Eric is separated from him. He gets angry, and the steel gate between him and his mother seem to respond. (It’s moving by itself!) This odd occurrence is immediately noticed by Sebastian Shaw, who later succeeds in forcing the power out of Eric by killing his mother. Once again in anger, Eric causes all sorts of metals to hurl through the air. The wooden chairs sigh in relief.

The sequence described above features the finest moments of “X-Men: First Class.” It is there where we are introduced to the young man who will one day be famously recognzied as Magneto. Shortly, we recall familiar names such as Charles (Professor X) and Raven (Mystique), but not at first sight. There is a curious connection between the two. They seem to be really close to one another. So close, in fact, that we wonder about the lack of communication between them in the “previous” X-Men movies.

Meanwhile, Sebastian Shaw, who is apparently a mutant himself, has an ambitious attempt to… rule the world… by provoking a third worldwide war. Charles does not approve, so he forms an alliance with Eric and gathers the help of fellow mutants. I do not like these fellow mutants.

To name a few, there’s Angel. She has wings. But wait, she also spits tiny balls of fire. Now what? Then there’s Havoc, who shoots red laser beams. We are reminded of Cyclops, and that’s it. There’s also Banshee; he screams a lot. Banshee can release a shriek so loud and painful, it affects the audience. If I ask you about these characters, can you tell me who they are without mentioning their abilities? Among others I have no time to talk about, these mutants are needless distractions from the film’s greater aspects.

When we go back to the character of Eric, we wish that the movie spends more time with him. The strength of his presence and the depth of his story made me think of the high possibility that this could have been a movie about Magneto as much as the previous installment was about Wolverine. Yes, “Wolverine” was a failure, but perhaps an X-Men movie purely about one mutant depends on that one mutant. (Imagine a full-length feature about the origins about that darn screamer, Banshee.) I believe Eric is a good candidate for a spin-off, but I’m afraid that it’s too late for that.

What happens with the other mutants is of little concern, since we already know who’ll live by the end and which side they shall take. It’s rather evident that “X-Men: First Class” could have been better if it dedicated more of its minutes to the right people, but nonetheless, apology accepted.

Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides

Rating: ★★★★☆

In her 1969 essay, “Trash, Art and the Movies”, Pauline Kael said, “Movies are so rarely great art, that if we cannot appreciate great trash, we have very little reason to be interested in them.”

What we’ve got here is a franchise that is absurd and preposterous, long and loud, silly and stupid. It has sailed to many seas and crossed numerous tides. These pirates have found treasures of all sorts and sizes, except common sense. We don’t need this franchise, but what elevates “Pirates of the Caribbean” from trash trash to great trash is that it fully recognizes its absurd, preposterous, long, loud, silly and stupid self.

I’ve always believed that dumb movies can be celebrated if it stuffs its empty brain with fun and humor. And it seems that there is not a moment in this movie where the characters treat the plot with any form of seriousness. Even when our heroes are at a state where their lives are in grave danger, they somehow manage to squeeze in a punch line and laugh, and we are invited to laugh with them.

Blood and alcohol, mostly alcohol, run through his veins. Yes, Captain Jack Sparrow has returned for a new adventure. This time, Orlando Bloom and Keira Knightly are nowhere to be found. Their long-awaited absence has paved way for an actor whose character actually requires some skills for acting. His name is Ian McShane, and he plays the notorious and naughty Blackbeard.

Because he never seems to change his clothes, Jack Sparrow is a pirate who is easily identified, and he is captured by the soldiers of London. When he is confronted by King George II, Sparrow learns that his former nemesis, Barbossa, is no longer a pirate and is now working for royalty. Also, Barbossa is missing a leg, but that’s a whole other story.

Also, word is out that the location of the mythical Fountain of Youth is discovered, and after Sparrow escapes imprisonment, a three-way race between the English, the Spanish, and the Pirates ensue. First one to show up at the fountain receives an extra long life. Along the way, we see some really cool stuff. During our first night on Blackbeard’s ship, the Queen Anne’s Revenge, a mutiny is lead by Captain Sparrow, which sadly fails. Blackbeard is not pleased, and we soon learn that his sword can control the ship really well, so ropes all around tie themselves around the unfortunate crew and they are suspended in the air for punishment. Hold on. Since Blackbeard has complete control of his ship, why does he need a crew to scrub his filthy deck in the first place? Because he is evil. That’s why.

Also, I must say that the Queen Anne’s Revenge has a flamethrower, which Blackbeard effectively uses in one of the film’s most thrilling sequences involving dozens of pretty, sexy, man-eating mermaids.

All of these moments are a visual treat, and are lots of fun. Compared to the other sequels, “On Stranger Tides” even uses less special effects and features a less complicated plot. And the additional energy provided by Blackbeard and Angelica, Jack’s former lover, gives new life previously drained by Will Turner and Elizabeth Swan. The changes are good, but I have reason to believe that the factor that makes this franchise afloat is that wily, charming Jack Sparrow.

I think most people like Jack Sparrow because he demonstrates a kind of freedom that we all desire to live out every once in awhile. Also, he talks like a drunk and runs like an idiot, which makes everything all the more fun when he’s battling against those sexy, man-eating mermaids.