A Piratey Question and PotC II & III News
Feb. 18th, 2005 09:59 pmJust a thought...
ETA: You all MUST read
kahva's wonderful reply to this question, detailed and logical, and plotbunny-producing! *saving to memories!*
And speaking of PotC, my niece provided some news on the PotC sequels, as reported by Disney insider, Jim Hill...
Are Disney's "Pirates" sequels about to set sail without Keith Richards?
It's less than two weeks 'til production is actually due to begin on those two high-anticipated follow-ups to "The Curse of the Black Pearl." But -- based on what Jim Hill has been hearing lately -- this Rolling Stone vet may have already passed on the opportunity to play Capt. Jack Sparrow's pop. Plus other "Pirates" -related news.
by Jim Hill
Late last fall, it was all that "Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl" fans could talk about. The rumor that Keith Richards -- the rock legend who supposedly inspired Johnny Depp's performance in the first "Pirates" picture -- had agreed to play Capt. Jack Sparrow's dad in the sequels.
Well, with less than two weeks to go 'til the official start of production, word has begun leaking out of producer Jerry Bruckheimer's office that it might be a bit premature to definitively say that the Rolling Stones vet is definitely going to appear in "Dead Man's Chest" as well as the yet-to-be-named third fim in the series.
"What's the problem?," you ask. Well, it appears that Disney's reps & Keith's people can't quite come to terms over what Richards' share of the "Pirates" booty should be. Given that Depp is reportedly recieving more than $20 million (as well as a chunk of the picture's back end) to reprise his role as Capt. Jack, Keith was supposedly looking for a similiar sized check to play Johnny's pappy. And -- given that Richards was only supposed to spend four days shooting his part of the picture (Whereas Depp will be on-set for the full 8-to-10 months that "Pirates II" & "III" are in production) -- Well ... I guess you can understand why the Mouse might be reluctant to give this rock star a seven figure salary for what is basically a glorified cameo.
That said ... Folks close to Bruckheimer's production office still say that it's still way too early to count Keith out. "We're going to try & keep the lines of communication open," said one un-named insider."With the hope that -- sometime between now and the end of October -- we can come to some sort of financial arrangement that both sides can live with. We still very much want Keith Richards to be a part of these pictures. To have Sparrow father & son on screen together. But -- as of this moment -- the numbers just aren't lining up. Maybe further on down the line, they will."
If this bit of bad press weren't bad enough ... Disney also finds itself dealing with Charles Williams, the chief of the Carib Indians. Who is said to be upset with the scenes for the sequel that will be shot on his home island of Dominica. Which will reportedly feature cannibalism. Which Williams sees an insult to the island's indigenous people.
Said one clearly frustrated member of the "Pirates" production team:
"Talk about making something out of nothing. We're not shooting a documentary that alleges that the Carib Indians ever indulged in cannibalism. We're shooting a big budget fantasy film where pretend pirates are threatened by pretend cannibals.
Though officials from Walt Disney Pictures have yet to officially comment on this somewhat sensitive issue, Bruckheimer's people are reportedly already talking with the film's director -- Gore Verbinksi -- about what they can possibly do to deal with Williams' complaints. After all, changing the shooting location for these back-to-back sequels isn't really an option this late in the game. By that I mean: Given that "Pirates" is supposed to shoot on Dominica for six-to-eight weeks, set construction for the films has already been underway for quite some time now.
Okay ... Enough with the bad news coming out of the "Pirates II" & "III" production offices. How would you folkslike to hear some good news associated with these two films?
Well, for starters, all you "Pirates" fans out there better start making room on your book shelves. For I hear that Jason Surrell (AKA the author of such well-received volumes as "The Haunted Mansion: From the Magic Kingdom to the Movies" and "Screenplay by Disney") has not one but two "Pirates" related books in the works. The first volume -- tentatively titled "Pirates of the Caribbean: From the Magic Kingdom to the Movies" -- will reportedly hit bookstore shelves sometime this fall. While a yet-untitled follow-up (which will cover the production of all three "Pirates" films) will be released in the Spring of 2007. Just before the third film in the trilogy rolls into theaters.
Also ... Speaking of fun "Pirates" - related stuff that we can all look forward to ... I hear that an official fan site for the "Pirates" trilogy will soon be popping up on the web. Given the folks who are associated with this project, I think that I can safely predict that this new website will be a hell of a lot of fun to visit. So -- as soon as I know the official URL -- I'll be sure and pass that info along to JHM readers.
Anyway ... That's pretty much it for today's "Pirates" related news. In the meantime, I'll keep you posted on what's going on with Disney's negotiations with Mr. Richards & Chief Williams. Though I can't help but think that both of these issues could be quickly dealt with were the Mouse to hire a real cannibal to to meet with Keith & Charles.
http://www.jimhillmedia.com/mb/articles/showarticle.php?ID=1308
How did Jack, and later Gibbs, know that Will was the ingredient needed to break the curse? I mean, Jack appeared to be surprised that the curse was actually true. How is it that he and Gibbs know that Will qualified as leverage? Am I missing something?
ETA: You all MUST read
And speaking of PotC, my niece provided some news on the PotC sequels, as reported by Disney insider, Jim Hill...
Are Disney's "Pirates" sequels about to set sail without Keith Richards?
It's less than two weeks 'til production is actually due to begin on those two high-anticipated follow-ups to "The Curse of the Black Pearl." But -- based on what Jim Hill has been hearing lately -- this Rolling Stone vet may have already passed on the opportunity to play Capt. Jack Sparrow's pop. Plus other "Pirates" -related news.
by Jim Hill
Late last fall, it was all that "Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl" fans could talk about. The rumor that Keith Richards -- the rock legend who supposedly inspired Johnny Depp's performance in the first "Pirates" picture -- had agreed to play Capt. Jack Sparrow's dad in the sequels.
Well, with less than two weeks to go 'til the official start of production, word has begun leaking out of producer Jerry Bruckheimer's office that it might be a bit premature to definitively say that the Rolling Stones vet is definitely going to appear in "Dead Man's Chest" as well as the yet-to-be-named third fim in the series.
"What's the problem?," you ask. Well, it appears that Disney's reps & Keith's people can't quite come to terms over what Richards' share of the "Pirates" booty should be. Given that Depp is reportedly recieving more than $20 million (as well as a chunk of the picture's back end) to reprise his role as Capt. Jack, Keith was supposedly looking for a similiar sized check to play Johnny's pappy. And -- given that Richards was only supposed to spend four days shooting his part of the picture (Whereas Depp will be on-set for the full 8-to-10 months that "Pirates II" & "III" are in production) -- Well ... I guess you can understand why the Mouse might be reluctant to give this rock star a seven figure salary for what is basically a glorified cameo.
That said ... Folks close to Bruckheimer's production office still say that it's still way too early to count Keith out. "We're going to try & keep the lines of communication open," said one un-named insider."With the hope that -- sometime between now and the end of October -- we can come to some sort of financial arrangement that both sides can live with. We still very much want Keith Richards to be a part of these pictures. To have Sparrow father & son on screen together. But -- as of this moment -- the numbers just aren't lining up. Maybe further on down the line, they will."
If this bit of bad press weren't bad enough ... Disney also finds itself dealing with Charles Williams, the chief of the Carib Indians. Who is said to be upset with the scenes for the sequel that will be shot on his home island of Dominica. Which will reportedly feature cannibalism. Which Williams sees an insult to the island's indigenous people.
Said one clearly frustrated member of the "Pirates" production team:
"Talk about making something out of nothing. We're not shooting a documentary that alleges that the Carib Indians ever indulged in cannibalism. We're shooting a big budget fantasy film where pretend pirates are threatened by pretend cannibals.
Though officials from Walt Disney Pictures have yet to officially comment on this somewhat sensitive issue, Bruckheimer's people are reportedly already talking with the film's director -- Gore Verbinksi -- about what they can possibly do to deal with Williams' complaints. After all, changing the shooting location for these back-to-back sequels isn't really an option this late in the game. By that I mean: Given that "Pirates" is supposed to shoot on Dominica for six-to-eight weeks, set construction for the films has already been underway for quite some time now.
Okay ... Enough with the bad news coming out of the "Pirates II" & "III" production offices. How would you folkslike to hear some good news associated with these two films?
Well, for starters, all you "Pirates" fans out there better start making room on your book shelves. For I hear that Jason Surrell (AKA the author of such well-received volumes as "The Haunted Mansion: From the Magic Kingdom to the Movies" and "Screenplay by Disney") has not one but two "Pirates" related books in the works. The first volume -- tentatively titled "Pirates of the Caribbean: From the Magic Kingdom to the Movies" -- will reportedly hit bookstore shelves sometime this fall. While a yet-untitled follow-up (which will cover the production of all three "Pirates" films) will be released in the Spring of 2007. Just before the third film in the trilogy rolls into theaters.
Also ... Speaking of fun "Pirates" - related stuff that we can all look forward to ... I hear that an official fan site for the "Pirates" trilogy will soon be popping up on the web. Given the folks who are associated with this project, I think that I can safely predict that this new website will be a hell of a lot of fun to visit. So -- as soon as I know the official URL -- I'll be sure and pass that info along to JHM readers.
Anyway ... That's pretty much it for today's "Pirates" related news. In the meantime, I'll keep you posted on what's going on with Disney's negotiations with Mr. Richards & Chief Williams. Though I can't help but think that both of these issues could be quickly dealt with were the Mouse to hire a real cannibal to to meet with Keith & Charles.
http://www.jimhillmedia.com/mb/articles/showarticle.php?ID=1308
no subject
Date: 2005-02-18 11:30 pm (UTC)Aside from the novelty of omg Keith Richard how cool is that!, I was kind of dreading it meself.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-19 06:37 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-18 11:46 pm (UTC)a guess: He'd heard tales about the Pearl's crew of the damned and their relentless search for offspring of a certain Bootstrap fellow, to break the curse. But he never took it seriously. So when he knew there was a curse, he knew the rest of it was probably (or possibly) also true?
Gibbs had heard it too, through the grapevine, but being superstitious, believed it all along.
??
no subject
Date: 2005-02-19 07:09 am (UTC)Answer, part one
Date: 2005-02-18 11:46 pm (UTC)I look at it this way... Jack is the one who had the compass, and therefore knew of the curse - apparently almost every pirate had heard of the curse, at least that's the between the lines impression I got. With Jack being the only one with the actual compass needed to find Muerte and the treasure (got it from a cartographer, according to the junior novelization of the movie), one could safely assume that he knew the full detail of the curse, that whoever removed a gold piece from the chest would be cursed, and would have to pay a blood debt to be free of the curse. Their blood would have to be paid back into the chest, along with the gold. I also think that the curse never specifically said that that very person's blood was what had to go into the chest, but "their blood" - meaning that the blood of kin could pay the debt as well.
I believe that Jack knew the full details of the curse, but as there were probably so many superstitions and alledged curses around, he didn't believe the curse was completely true. He probably thought the cartographer was just spinning an old wives' tale, or just flat out trying to make the gold seem more mysterious, and therefore all the more enticing. Therefore, when Twigg and Maillot show up and he sees that the curse is real, he is geniunely surprised. Who would've thought a story that wild was actually true?
Now, as for Will being the key to everything... Jack says himself that he's one of the few people who knew Bootstrap Bill as William Turner. That implies that the two were more than just crewmates, but truly good friends. Following that reasoning, Bill very likely told Jack about his wife and son back home in England, and no doubt told Jack his son's name. So that means that Jack knows Bill has a son. If there are any other children of Bill's, Jack is unware of them, hence his referring to Will later on as Bill Turner's only child.
Jump to the mutiny. Bootstrap is only one man, if he had tried to stop the mutiny, when the rest of the crew was clearly siding with Barbossa, he wouldn't have been able to accomplish anything other then getting himself killed, or being marooned with Jack. So depending on which line of thought you follow, Bill either decided on his own that he couldn't stop the mutiny, or Jack talked Bill out of doing something stupid. If Jack had truly believed the curse was genuine, I think he would've warned Bill early on, maybe try to have Bill marooned with him. Heck, I think if Jack had fully believed in the curse, he never would've gone after the gold to start with, in which case we wouldn't have gotten our movie. :) So Jack believes that Bill will be safe with Barbossa's crew so long as he doesn't make too many waves, and probably believes that as soon as he is able, Bill will break from Barbossa's crew. Again, depending on your line of thought ( or the line of thought from your own piratical plot bunnies ) perhaps Bill had even promised to come back for Jack somehow, or if Jack escaped on his own in some miraculous fashion, they would meet up somewhere, and Jack could plot out his revenge on Barbossa.
Now, we all know what Barbossa had done to Bill when Bill complained about how Jack had been treated - which could either be his not being able to stay quiet in the face of such dishonor, or he could've been trying to find a way to get them to go back for Jack. Bill is sent to the "crushing black oblivion of Davey Jones' Locker". Pirates being what they are, particularly this crew, I believe that they most likely bragged about how they got rid of the lone dissenter in their midst. This is before the pirates realized that they were cursed, or either before they realized just how truly awful the curse was. Now either Jack told them the full story of the curse at the beginning, enough of them knew the full story beforehand, or they found out the full story afterwards of what the curse really entailed, and how to break it. With having gotten rid of Bill, that meant that they had to find his child, the one he'd sent off a piece of the gold to. Thus begins the hunt for all the gold they'd "frittered away", and for the child of Bootstrap Bill.
TBC
Re: Answer, part two
Date: 2005-02-18 11:48 pm (UTC)Jump to ten years after the mutiny. Jack's bound to have heard at some point and time what Barbossa had had done to Bootstrap, and he's probably heard about them hunting down the cursed gold. He's possibly even heard about them looking for Bootstrap's child, but even if he hasn't, he can safely assume that if they're hunting down all the gold pieces, they're likely hunting for Bootstrap's son too, since they "killed" Bootstrap all those years ago before they knew just how cursed they were. But Jack is looking out for Jack at this point, and doesn't believe there really is a curse, so he's not actively looking for the cursed gold or Will. Now, having known so much about the curse, he probably knew what the gold was supposed to look like, so when he rescues Elizabeth and sees the coin, he recognizes it, and wonders just how this proper young lady got such a thing. We all know what happened in the movie, and his meeting up with Will that first time, so once he was locked up, a part of his mind had to be wondering about that gold coin, how did Elizabeth Swann get it, and why did that blacksmith look so familiar? But Jack is still looking out for Jack right now.
Then we have the attack on Port Royal, and Jack sees for himself that the curse is real. I believe that the wheels started spinning then, but at that point, it's all just very interesting information, he still has very few answers. Come morning, he finds out that Elizabeth has been taken, and he finds this out from the familiar-looking blacksmith who is clearly taken with Elizabeth, and also is clearly desperate to rescue her. Jack still sees no profit in it for him to help out, until he is informed that Will can easily free him from the gaol.
Jack is a curious creature, and he simply has to know - who is this young man? He's so familiar. Jack may even have a suspicion by this point that this could be Bill's son, or maybe not. But once Will tells Jack his name, and confirms that he was indeed named after his father, Jack very quickly puts things together. Elizabeth was either given the coin by Will, or she took it from him somehow. Bill probably believed in the curse, but had gone with Jack because of their friendship. Jack can suppose that after the mutiny, Bill would've sent the coin off to his son to insure Barbossa and crew remained cursed, in retribution for what had been done to Jack. Or, if Bill didn't believe in the curse, sending the coin to Will is just the sort of thing Bill would've done so that his son could have a souvenir of the adventure. Either way, Jack has figured out that somehow Bill got the coin to Will, somehow Elizabeth got it, the curse is actually true, and therefore Elizabeth and Will are in great danger. Elizabeth, because Jack knows that Barbossa will either kill her, or "waste not", after he discovers that her blood isn't what they need. Will is in danger because he's his father's son, and Barbossa will never stop until he finds Will.
And, if Jack owes anyone anything, it is most likely Bill Turner. Here is his opportune moment, not only for escape, but revenge against Barbossa not only for the mutiny, but for what he did to Bill. And, it puts him back on the Black Pearl as captain where he belongs, if all goes well. He'll not let Barbossa harm Will, and Jack's not a cruel man, deep down he doesn't want to see Elizabeth be harmed either. Not that he'll ever admit that point blank. So by putting everything together, all the facts and all the stories of Barbossa for the last ten years, he knows that Will is the key to ending the curse.
TBC
Re: Answer, part three
Date: 2005-02-18 11:50 pm (UTC)Now as for Gibbs, it's actually pretty simple, I think. They establish early on that he's very superstitious, so I believe that he at some point and time heard all about the curse, and Barbossa, and I think he also likely heard about what was done to Bootstrap. We all saw his reaction to Jack's statement that he was going after the Pearl. Following that reasoning, then when Jack informs Gibbs that Will is Bill's only child, Gibbs also knows that Will is the key to breaking the curse. He obviously can't know if Will has the last coin with him right then or not, but he can assume that either Barbossa has it, or Will does. Whatever the case is, Jack's got leverage against Barbossa, because he needs Will's blood, and Jack wants the Pearl. After all, if one was enjoying being cursed, why try to gather up all the cursed gold again? Logic states that Barbossa has to be trying to break the curse, ergo, he needs the blood of all those who took a piece from the chest - or from their bloodline. Which means Will.
And this is probably a waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay longer explanation that what you were looking for, but I believe this is the path that Jack followed in his reasoning. Gibbs knows Jack very well by this point, knows the story, so there's the path he followed. And if anyone would be able to recognize the child of Bootstrap Bill, it should be a close friend of Bill's - Jack Sparrow. I think Jack would make a pretty good detective, following the clues like that. :)
I will now stop my rambling, and I do sincerely apologize if I've unleashed any piratical plot bunnies. I honestly tried to keep mine in check, but I've got my Bootstrap muse, Will muse and Jack muse now all sitting on top of my computer monitor, staring at me with evil gleams in their eyes. I think I'm a goner...
And on a totally unrelated note, I'm really enjoying your latest Harry and the Pirate fic! I have to admit, I'd been hoping for Will and maybe Elizabeth to get into some trouble in this adventure, but it seems they're going to be staying safely in Port Royal, sitting this one out.
But there's still Harry, Jack and James who are surely going to get into trouble, and little Tom too. {Rubs hands together in anticipation} So, when's the next chapter? :) {bats innocent kitten eyes} :)
Re: Answer, part three
Date: 2005-02-19 07:06 am (UTC)What an utter darling you are, writing this fascinating and very logical reply to my question. Yes, indeed, plot bunnies are hopping to and fro, and I'll save this to memories to resurrect them after I'm through with Harry IV.
Speaking of which, I wanted (truly!) to bring Will and Elizabeth along for the ride, mainly for you, although I know there are other W/E fans out there, too. But, plotwise, it just didn't make sense to me. I'm so sorry. I'm glad you are enjoying the story anyway. And I'm thinking Will and Elizabeth might just go along to Italy with Harry and Jack, et al, when they return the cup. ;)
Re: Answer, part three
Date: 2005-02-19 11:54 am (UTC)And I kinda figured that your plot in Harry wasn't allowing Will and Liz to come along, but like I said, I'm loving the story no matter what! You spin wonderful yarns, and I swear, Harry truly does feel like she belongs there in POTC, and has felt like that from day one. Excellent work!!
Must go now and feed the feline, he's giving me one of those looks. Glad you liked my rambling, and keep up the excellent work on Harry! :)
Re: Answer, part three
Date: 2005-02-19 12:18 pm (UTC)Am about to begin writing the next chapter. Hopefully it will go quickly (it could happen!) and I'll be able to finish by tomorrow night. Then I can finish the Valentine one--better late than never, eh? It is a Harry I 'deleted scene' in which Jack tells Harry of another lady he met when they were both very young--the lady is a character that will be introduced in my next chapter of Harry IV. Such fun stuff! I'd better get to work.
Btw, l saw your link for
Will & Liz will be in the next Harry story--I promise!!
no subject
Date: 2005-02-19 04:07 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-19 07:17 am (UTC)You're right. As I said above, to
Sparrow's Pappy...
Date: 2005-02-19 11:36 pm (UTC)Re: Sparrow's Pappy...
Date: 2005-02-20 12:13 am (UTC)Re: Sparrow's Pappy...
Date: 2005-02-20 12:17 am (UTC)I'm sorry, was that evil of me?
Re: Sparrow's Pappy...
Date: 2005-02-20 01:16 am (UTC)Poor Keith. I thought he was fairly good-looking when he was a kid. He hasn't aged well, to say the least.
You're still up! Wish my stupid chat thingy worked. Oh well. I'm replying to your email, though.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-20 01:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-20 02:02 pm (UTC)Oh, yes. Me too. That's one of the fun things about the character, and about writing fanfic--one can go so many different ways with SparrowHistory.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-19 01:59 pm (UTC)I agree with Kahva about the curse. :)
no subject
Date: 2005-02-19 02:16 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-19 02:32 pm (UTC)I wonder, though, how much do "they" think "we" really want this? Enough that they'll cater to his demands? ick. please, no.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-19 02:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-19 02:44 pm (UTC)I think they should get Tim Curry ;)
no subject
Date: 2005-02-19 02:47 pm (UTC)Why the heck aren't they asking us?
no subject
Date: 2005-02-19 03:04 pm (UTC)But I'm guessing it's gonna be a father/son theme all around, being they've cast Bootstrap, so maybe they really do have to cast pop sparrow. I just hope they'll focus more on the characters than on the actors (or non-actors) playing them; that was my worry with KR.
And I don't know why they don't ask us! If they asked ME, it'd be a "Sparrow & Norrington stranded together on some unknown island..." movie. (OK maybe that's why they don't ask)
no subject
Date: 2005-02-20 12:48 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-20 01:17 am (UTC)nope... not kidding, and not dead yet.
Date: 2005-02-20 01:20 am (UTC)Oh, and check my latest post on the yahoo group! Master Replicas is making the Jack Sparrow ring!!!
no subject
Date: 2005-02-20 12:28 pm (UTC)Cheers for posting that, BTW. I can't wait for those books to come out.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-20 12:38 pm (UTC)You're very welcome. My niece, who works at Disneyland, passes info along when she can, and then we have a new source of info,
pumpbeg her for updates.And yes, the books should be great--more piratey fun!
no subject
Date: 2005-02-20 02:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-20 02:09 pm (UTC)