Talk:Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End

Archives
Apr 06 - Jan 07 Feb 07 - May 07 June 07 - July 07 Aug 07 - Dec 08

I'm fairly sure Hans Zimmer composed the original themes, not Klaus Badelt

I definitely, definitely read somewhere that Hans Zimmer composed most of the themes for the first film, but had to leave before he could piece it all together and put it in the film, and that one of his 'students' of some description, Klaus Badelt, along with others, made it all fit together. I'm completely alien to how to rework the part of the page with wrong information, but if someone who's familiar with it is willing, I'll try and find sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.47.213.46 (talk) 16:41, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Someone has a Will Turner fetish

Today (7th December 2008) a user with IP address 86.69.27.28 has, so far, made 17 edits in an attempt to re-write what happened at the end of the movie re Will and Elizabeth. These have all been undone by myself and others here - has anyone reported this user in an attempt to stop them carrying out any further edits?--Gaunt (talk) 22:26, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

It's the same editor in the "Will's son" section, who believes because a PG-13 film could not show Will and Elizabeth conceiving their child Will Turner III is not their son. Alientraveller (talk) 22:37, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, if the editor in question is reading this I have to ask the following - as no-one is shown 'going to the bathroom' does this mean that the characters lack the necessary facilities for toileting? ;-) --Gaunt (talk) 22:57, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

I think in a way you guys are both in the wrong about this. You need sources to vaildate these things, but there may be a solution. I dont have the dvd myself but providing the character is will`s son shouldnt he be listed in the credits at the end of the movie? That said providing if there is no source to back it up, and that theres no source to say he is or isnt then the stauts quo should be present 'Elizabeth and a young boy stand on the hill top observing Wills return'. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a furom for interpreting the movie by viewers ie 'his son' 'her son'. Provide a source or it can be deleted. Ottawa4ever (talk) 18:03, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, he is listed here: [1] - Dominic Scott Kay plays Young Will Turner in At World's End. Can't get any more legitimate than that really.--Gaunt (talk) 20:16, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch, Who would have thought a source could clear up everything?Ottawa4ever (talk) 23:10, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

okay heres another source. http://www.ultimatedisney.com/dominicscottkay-interview.html apparently its based on an interview and mentions hes the spawn of elizabeth and Will. or;

http://www.hollywood.com/celebrity/Dominic_Scott_Kay/1610576 anyway theres bound to be a source. Has anyone read the credit roll either? anyway hope one of these is acceptable, cheers Ottawa4ever (talk) 15:49, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

The problem is here .. you impose the fact they consummate on the island but they MAY consumate OR not. 

The boy's name is Young Will Turner ? God that doesn't prove he is Will's son... He can be adopted or another men son if his mother name is Turner and if she decide to name him William that doesn't made Will as a father. He MAY be the father or not. Nobody knows . Stop to decide of the consumation, the parently and faithful !!! Liz can have consummate or not, can have carry Will's baby or another's man baby and nothing prove she has been faithful... It only a willabeth interpretation —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.192.226.159 (talk) 22:23, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

WP:ASSUMEGOODFAITH. However, we cannot assume good faith with you clearly because you willingly want to bring this 'Willabeth/Sparrowbeth' nonsense into articles. They got married, they had a son, deal with it, bring your opinions to another website. Alientraveller (talk) 23:31, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

OK, the link's not working, but at the end of the day, it's you who draws multiple conclusions from your imagination. It's your opinion, and your speculation does not belong. Only you have an issue with an ending everyone else describes. You are in denial. Alientraveller (talk) 23:40, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Lastly, WP:UNDUEWEIGHT. To quote Wikipedia's founder, "If a viewpoint is held by an extremely small (or vastly limited) minority, it does not belong in Wikipedia regardless of whether it is true or not and regardless of whether you can prove it or not, except perhaps in some ancillary article." So I reiterate you take your conspiracy theories elsewhere. Alientraveller (talk) 23:48, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

to add to this, if something is present in more than 5 sources so ive been told, its common knowlege, we shouldnt actually have to refer to the credit reel (but I figure that helps dispell it a bit). Theres enough links on the web that it can be shown its there son so. Its kind of stretching it to go on a bit with this. Happy editing Ottawa4ever (talk) 13:42, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

GA Sweeps: Pass

As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I went through the article and made various changes, please look them over. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. Altogether the article is well-written and is still in great shape after its passing in 2007. The lead would benefit from being shortened a bit. I reduced it a bit, but I've only seen the film once, so it would be beneficial for the main authors to take a look. Continue to improve the article making sure all new information is properly sourced and neutral. It may be beneficial to look for any updates, or see if there were any more recent stories in the news. I would also recommend updating the access dates of the sources. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have updated the article history to reflect this review. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:06, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

The most successful film of 2007?!

"Critical reviews were mixed, but At World's End was a box office hit, becoming the most successful film of 2007, grossing approximately $960 million worldwide, and making it the second most successful in the series, behind Dead Man's Chest." Um, where was Spider-Man 3 when this happened? 71.62.192.242 (talk) 11:58, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Track List

Someone should add a track list to the article. Math Champion | sign! 23:56, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Cleanup needed in Cast section regarding trained monkeys playing Jack The Monkey

I have added a cleanup tag in the Cast section specifically for the entry regarding the trained monkeys who played Jack The Monkey. The entry is poorly written and has a couple of spelling & grammar errors. Furthermore I am not in favour of the use of the word 'adorable' in that section. FatDaks (talk) 01:48, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Highest production Budget?

someone show the citation to this...Furgoth (talk) 21:33, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

The Plot Summary Was Unspecific and Misleading

I find that more details are needed.198.36.203.162 (talk) 17:21, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

I recommend that you review WP:FILMPLOT. The current summary is already overly-long and detailed. If anything it needs material removed, not added. Doniago (talk) 17:36, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Yeah this one is on my to-do list for clean up. It's way too long and goes into all sorts of trivial things that don't matter. It's gonna take me a while to get to it though. Feel free to beat me to it. =) Millahnna (mouse)talk 23:15, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

And deprive you of the pleasure of doing it yourself? (laughs) We'll see whether I have the time...it's possible. Doniago (talk) 00:22, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

I've got it under 800 words. I think that should suffice for a 3+ hour movie. Doniago (talk) 20:13, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Was this really that long? No wonder I didn't want to watch it again. Good job. Millahnna (mouse)talk 06:21, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

File:On sets of POTC 3.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:On sets of POTC 3.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 14 August 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 10:53, 14 August 2011 (UTC)