Comments | sparrowsupport: Is it AWE or is it AWWWWW?

sparrowsupport

Is it AWE or is it AWWWWW?

May 28, 2007 21:25

So many Sparrabethians have been heart broken over the latest installment of POTC that it's compelled me to write a more detailed analysis over why it is "not so bad" as Kraken phelgm when looked at from an analytical perspective. To preface the anaylsis, I'll say two things. First: J/E cannot be found in AWE except by those who already know where ( Read more... )

Comments 34

geekmama June 3 2007, 15:35:55 UTC

I think the filmmakers (including the writers) have far too much fun playing with their audience with the use of aural and visual puzzles. But I think too that their goal in making the sequels was to showcase Jack and Elizabeth's relationship in a way that revealed them as soulmates but still left her with Will in the end. It's something that's been in the back of my mind since DMC came out.

You've raised some really excellent points about the subtext in AWE here. I saw the movie again last night (4th time, omg, and I'm going to the El Capitan again tomorrow for a 5th with compassrose7577) and I was looking at the interaction between Jack and Elizabeth during the last half in particular. I'm quite convinced that their love story is as valid as Will and Elizabeth's ever was, and though the Casablanca ending is in place, there's no saying they won't meet again, and certainly will in fanfiction.

geekmama June 3 2007, 15:39:10 UTC

Btw, I hope you don't mind if I post a link to this on our J/E recs page, and link it at my journal.

Subtext and visual story telling... sparrowsupport June 4 2007, 15:53:54 UTC

Thanks for taking the time to comment! I'm jealous that you get to see the film at the El Capitan!!

As far as film makers and writers go, they're supposed to put symbolism and foreshadowing into film. That's what transforms a mediocre film into a classic. The best comparison of screen writing I've ever seen was when someone compared film to poetry which is condensed prose i.e. saying as much as possible with as few words as possible. Film is no different, only each frame of the movie has to convey as much story as possible.

Re: Subtext and visual story telling... geekmama June 4 2007, 18:01:18 UTC

As far as film makers and writers go, they're supposed to put symbolism and foreshadowing into film. That's what transforms a mediocre film into a classic.

True, but this isn't an arthouse movie, it's a Disney Pirate flick. Many (I might say a majority) of the people that go to see summer action blockbusters aren't expecting to be teased with a lot of subtext, and looking at the movie in a superficial way, a lot of the movie is quite dark and the ending is quite a downer after watching and waiting and growing attached to these characters through the two previous movies. This seems to be reflected in the weekend's box office numbers, quite low (42 million in the US) considering this was only the movie's second weekend. I'm not saying the subtext shouldn't be there, I'm just saying that some clarification might have made it more marketable for a general audience. I think the filmmakers got a little carried away with their oh-so-cleverness, and I really feel they took some risks with the tone of the movie.

choose2live June 4 2007, 00:06:34 UTC

What a fascinating perspective! I especially love the Jones/Sparrow parallels - something I had never considered. I've always felt that AWE was very J/E friendly in general, and your observations have added much fuel to that fire. You've given me a lot to think about for my next viewing! (guh, I need it to come out on DVD already, there's too much in it to process without seeing it a bazillion times)

Thanks for taking the time to put your observations together - I'm a huge fan of AWE and hope that more people will come to appreciate its brilliance, and meta like this helps a lot!

Wow, thanks! sparrowsupport June 4 2007, 15:56:57 UTC

Thank you for commenting on what I've written. I'm so glad that other people like AWE too! Sometimes it seems like there are only a handful of J/E shippers who do.

On your next viewing, you should post your observations here. I'd be curious to see what you pick up!

Cheers :)

Re: Wow, thanks! choose2live June 4 2007, 22:02:14 UTC

I actually stayed away from LJ for a week after seeing AWE 'cause I had a feeling a lot of people wouldn't like it... and didn't want people to rain on my parade. LOL I think I was helped by the fact that I never expected a happy J/E ending. Wanted one, heck yeah, but knew I was unlikely to get it. So the first time I saw it I was all over the general lack of W/E shippiness and the expressions of J/E trust, etc. Besides, it was just a really, really excellent movie overall. (now, don't get me on my soapbox about the ending for Elizabeth's character arc, but other than that, I adore the film)

I'll be seeing AWE again tomorrow with a bunch of friends, I'll try to see if I can come up with something that hasn't already been meta'd. :) If you haven't read it already, a really excellent meta is dollsome's J/E AWE meta, and I posted a lot of my thoughts in the comments (at the end of the third page). Hopefully I'll have more thoughts after tomorrow!

Re: Wow, thanks! choose2live June 7 2007, 14:16:38 UTC

On your next viewing, you should post your observations here. I'd be curious to see what you pick up!

I took your advice, and picked up a LOT! But it's too much to post here - check it out at my LJ, though, if you like: Jack, Freedom, and Elizabeth in AWE

Thread 5

erinya June 4 2007, 00:22:06 UTC

Fascinating stuff here. I must admit, when I first read the bit about the peanut representing happiness, I thought "Oh, come on...that's a stretch."

And then I thought about it some more, and about the other times the peanut shows up in the movie and I realized that OMG, you're right. But how do you read Barbossa feeding the peanut to Jack the monkey in the end?

Stop rhyming, I mean it....Anybody want a peanut? sparrowsupport June 4 2007, 16:09:23 UTC

Great question!

It's funny that you mention the bit about the peanut. When I wrote the essay, even I thought the interpretation was a bit of a stretch! But a few days after I'd written, Johnny Depp explained a little about the peanut in an interview.

He said something to the effect of: "when you don't have anything, a peanut seems like an awful lot." I think that quote fits pretty nicely with what the peanut seems to represent in through out the film: a small shred of hope and happiness.

As far as the peanut being fed to the monkey, I'll pose a question to you:

What do they call the monkey? ;)

Re: Stop rhyming, I mean it....Anybody want a peanut? erinya June 4 2007, 17:38:25 UTC

Are you saying that the monkey is a Jack stand-in? I took it more as Barbossa gleefully taking Jack-the-human's happiness (as he takes the Pearl.) Although I guess you might make an argument for Jack-the-monkey as Jack's id, maybe.

Re: Stop rhyming, I mean it....Anybody want a peanut? sparrowsupport June 9 2007, 16:10:57 UTC

Not so much a stand in actually, although I liked your idea of the monkey being Jack's id.

My thinking was that it had more to do with the significance of the monkey's name than anything else.

My take on the Pearl is slightly different than most, however. Ted or Terry wrote at one time that Jack's choice to sell his soul to Jones in exchange for the Pearl had changed its meaning from Freedom, to Slavery. (If I have time I'll dig out the quote).

With that interpretation in mind, my opinion is that by stealing the Pearl from Jack, he's actually breaking that bondage and freeing Jack to pursue his happiness (i.e. the Peanut). So since the monkey's name is Jack and Barbossa is feeding the monkey the peanut, it takes on the symbolism that Jack, thanks to Barbossa's treachery, is free to pursue whatever happiness will fulfill his life.

choose2live June 4 2007, 01:03:51 UTC

Oh! And one more thing: the sheer IDEA that Jack's not going after the Pearl again! Want to talk about something that never occurred to me. I saw it more as a 'full circle' ending, myself. Still, my brain's a-whirl with the sheer weirdness of the idea, and it's very interesting. There's evidence to support it, as you said (though there's also the argument that Jack will look for the Pearl by going where Barbossa wants to go - how they're supposed to find each other, though, I can't say). Jack giving up the Pearl! The Pearl, who (in fandom, at least) became the symbol of his One True Love... that in and of itself has interesting J/E ramifications (e.g. having to give up Elizabeth allowed him to be honest enough with himself to give up the Pearl). Now I want to start talking about Elizabeth/Pearl parallels... Jack equated the Pearl to freedom, but once he had her, he was bound to her by responsibility and therefore less free (in certain respects) than when he didn't have her. The same can be said of love - love is a great thing ( ... )

anonymous June 4 2007, 13:27:05 UTC

First I'd like to say that your interpretation of the movie is very interesting and detailed and in many places simply beautiful. But there are some things where I don't exactly agree with you ( ... )

Same story, different versions and both of them true sparrowsupport June 9 2007, 16:20:30 UTC

And that is the beauty of film! Two people can see the same movie and get two different, but ultimately satisfying endings.

And yes, the Pearl was freedom to Jack in COTBP, not arguing that point. But, there is a quote from the writers which specifically states that ultimately, Jack's deal with Jones to raise the Pearl from the depths came to pervert the meaning of the Pearl because it came to represent Jack's bondage to Jones. Since people are asking about it, I may find the quote and post it on the journal.

Either way, you make some very valid points, and I appreciate your perspective. :)