[omegaman]

Just watched it. Nothing like the first three except for Jack Sparrow!

Its a good example of what happens when you change director in midships!

Pray to God (or whomever) that JJ and Co keep the reins of Trek, at least until they have 3 movies back to back under their belt!

[Captain Tom Coughlin]

I've only ever seen the first one. One day I may catch up on the rest

[kevin]

After seeing the first three, I'm over Cap'n Jack. I didn't even bother to go see the fourth and have no inclination to.

[jerhanner]

The first one was wonderful. After that, meh.

Alas that the Boy is now WAY into PotC Legos and PS3 game, so yeah, I've had to watch them all again.

[jla1987]

Originally Posted by jerhanner

The first one was wonderful. After that, meh.

Agreed. The third one is still very near the top of my worst movies ever list.

[horatio]

Originally Posted by omegaman

Just watched it. Nothing like the first three except for Jack Sparrow!

Its a good example of what happens when you change director in midships!

Pray to God (or whomever) that JJ and Co keep the reins of Trek, at least until they have 3 movies back to back under their belt!

I don't get your point. You claim that the last one sucked because of a new director after three movies but in Trek Abrams should stay aboard for at least three movies?
So what is your "mandatory director engagement", three or six movies?

I liked the fourth movie, it felt pretty fresh.

[Jed Starkiller]

I liked the last one a lot better than 2 and 3. I didn't think I would but Jack Sparrow was a bit more interesting in it.

[horatio]

Perhaps because the former two ones have been two epic? Normally building a universe with many characters is a good idea but it came at a high price in this instance, focusing too little on the main character.

[omegaman]

Originally Posted by horatio

I don't get your point. You claim that the last one sucked because of a new director after three movies but in Trek Abrams should stay aboard for at least three movies?
So what is your "mandatory director engagement", three or six movies?

I liked the fourth movie, it felt pretty fresh.

Well, I don't believe it was the writers, who penned the script for the first three. The last movie definitely lacked something the others did not, and the director was the only thing that changed apart from several cast members being present.

My point is that let's not change horses in mid stream regardless of how many movies are to be made. I don't think that works for continuity of feel, if that makes sense. The style established in the first JJ Trek movie is what makes it a winner in my opinion.

[horatio]

But was it really a change in the middle of something, wasn't the first trilogy over and now a second respectively a bunch of more loosely connected movies is about to start?
I am also for directorial consistency but not beyond the three many are set out to make in the case of movie franchises.