Every Pirates Of The Caribbean Movie Ranked

Landlubbers, ye be warned, there be spoilers for the "Pirates of the Caribbean" movies ahead.

Although the original "Pirates of the Caribbean" film, "The Curse of the Black Pearl," released in 2003, is still widely beloved and properly appreciated, the rest of the franchise gets a bad rap. The consensus is that director Gore Verbinski made one good movie, but everything after that was a bad case of diminishing returns. 

It's a shame, because some of those sequels are pretty great. In fact, one of them is even better than the original, if you can believe it. Making the first three "Pirates" films age even better is their absurdly strong CGI, which is impressive even by today's standards, and their willingness to get weird and creative in a way that so many modern franchises refuse to do. It's fun to watch a big blockbuster film that takes itself seriously and isn't afraid of big swings or constantly undermining itself with cheap "bathos" humor. Although not every "Pirates" movie is worth watching, the franchise as a whole definitely deserved a better reception than it's gotten. 

Below is my ranking of the five "Pirates" films, with the caveat that this doesn't represent the views of /Film as a whole. Some of my coworkers are unhappy with what I've placed as #1; tragically, they don't all share my great taste in cinema.

Unfortunately, every bad thing people said about the first two "Pirates" sequels is true for this one. "Dead Men Tell No Tales" is tired and lifeless, while the plot is messy and borderline nonsensical. Johnny Depp is totally phoning it in as Jack Sparrow by this point, and Sparrow himself is written as a disappointing, drunken buffoon. Some fans were outraged when the news broke that Depp wouldn't be starring in a sixth movie (although, at the time of writing, Disney has yet to confirm much of anything about "Pirates of the Caribbean 6"), but "Dead Men Tell No Tales" makes it clear that Sparrow is no longer the compelling lead this franchise needs. (More on this later.)

The movie also feels like more of a theme park ride than an actual film, which is a shame because it's not even a good-looking theme park ride. The visual effects are somehow worse here than what the franchise had given us 10 years earlier, the actions scenes a far cry from the heights of the giant wheel sequence from "Dead Man's Chest" or the maelstrom from "At World's End." Even the connections we get to the original trilogy, like the storyline with Elizabeth and Will's son Henry (Brenton Thwaites), feel oddly hollow. There's just nothing here that works. It's no wonder the sixth film (whoever it ends up starring) is expected to be more of a reboot than a sequel. After a mess like this, starting from scratch seems like the safest bet.

For "Dead Men Tell No Tales" I wrote that Jack Sparrow was no longer a good fit for the series' leading man, but that was a lie. Truth is, he was never supposed to be the leading man of this series. The first three films work as well as they do because Will (Orlando Bloom) and Elizabeth (Keira Knightley) were always the main protagonists. Jack may have gotten an increasingly indulgent amount of screentime, but it was always these two who were growing and changing, driving the plot with their questionable decision-making. Jack was always supposed to be the chaotic wildcard of these films; always important, sure, but never the main guy.

That's why "On Stranger Tides" fails: it puts nearly all the focus on Jack Sparrow, but immediately reveals him as a character without any of the substance needed for a leading man role. His character arc feels trivial, meaningless, and this feeling is cemented when he abandons his girlfriend/enemy Angelica (Penélope Cruz) on a deserted island at the end. It's a scene that's supposed to be funny but comes off as oddly mean-spirited. After two and a half hours focused on these characters, this is how their relationship concludes?

Making matters worse, "On Stranger Tides" includes a romance between new characters Philip (Sam Claflin) and Syrena (Astrid Bergès-Frisbey), but doesn't let them drive the plot. Their relationship just sort of exists as a B-story to Jack's A-story, one that could be cut almost entirely without affecting Jack in any way. It's a writing choice that fundamentally misunderstands the appeal of Will and Elizabeth in the first three films, making Philip and Syrena's romance pretty forgettable.

The worst thing "Dead Man's Chest" does is get a little too cartoonish at points. There's a moment on the cannibal island where Jack falls hundreds of feet off a cliff and somehow survives without a scratch; there's some good visual comedy here, but it's a sequence that kills the sense of stakes and realism the first film had. It makes you realize, "Oh, so none of this matters. We're operating on Looney Tunes logic here." The silliness isn't inherently bad — "At World's End" uses it to great effect — but it takes some getting used to.

Although "Dead Man's Chest" isn't as spotless as "The Curse of the Black Pearl," and its plot isn't as tight and coherent, it makes up for it in sheer ambition. Like any good sequel, this movie's not interested in simply repeating the beats of the film before it; instead, it takes the characters on a whole new journey, expanding the world and deepening a lot of the themes the original movie set up. Will reunites with his father, Elizabeth fully gives up on the idea of a happy life in civilized society, and Jack is forced to properly deal with his own mortality. Even the minor characters from the first movie, like the once-straightlaced James Norrington, are far more compelling here.

"Dead Man's Chest" also introduces Davy Jones (Bill Nighy), who's easily the most interesting, terrifying, and best developed villain in the entire series. Alongside him is Lord Beckett (Tom Hollander), who deserves more credit as the trilogy's slimy, cunning, pirate-hating final boss. Fans may have been disappointed that both bad guys survive this film, leading to "Dead Man's Chest" feeling like half a movie, but the truth is that both characters were way too interesting to be confined to a single installment. This film was the start of the common fandom complaint that the story had gotten too complicated, but there's so much attention to detail here that it all works out, especially on rewatch. Maybe most impressive is the way the movie invents an entire new gambling game and trusts its audience to understand the complicated rules without ever spelling it out too clearly.

Also worth noting: has any PG-13 monster ever been as terrifying as the Kraken is here?

The only film in the franchise that everyone agrees is great, "The Curse of the Black Pearl" is a masterclass in efficient storytelling. Whereas the sequels are often critiqued for their longwinded nature, this movie gets right to the point; within minutes we know almost everything there is to know about Will and Elizabeth, just in time for the charming Jack Sparrow to swoop into Port Royal and ruin everything for everyone. This is the "Pirates" film that most clearly understands what Jack's role in the story should be. He the unpredictable frenemy of main characters Will and Elizabeth — someone who shouldn't be trusted but can prove worthwhile if the circumstances are just right.

Although this movie is an exciting adventure story that made pirates cool again, it doesn't make the top spot because it's a little too by the book. It abides too closely to the typical Hero's Journey structure and, as such, is a little too safe and unchallenging. There's comfort in predictability and simplicity, but I prefer a "Pirates" movie that gets real weird with it, dialing things up to 11 in the first act and only getting wilder from there. Indeed, the top pick on this list is the one "Pirates" movie that refuses to play it safe, even for a moment...

What's funny about "At World's End" is that if you see it playing on TV and decide to tune in at a random spot, there's a 99% chance you're about to stumble upon what would be the wildest scene in any other movie. This film is absurd; massive over-the-top action scenes, tentacle monsters all over the place, a woman/god who turns into a giant and then morphs into thousands of crabs, several sequences of Jack Sparrow clones bickering with each other, Keith Richards carrying around his wife's shrunken head, and so on.

This movie's not just weird, it's absurdly convoluted. Jack, Will, and Elizabeth all have opposing, constantly shifting motives, as do Barbossa, Tia Dalma, Beckett, Norrington, and newcomer Sao Feng. This was like a season of "Game of Thrones" condensed into a single movie, with its morally gray characters who can die at any moment, and its multiple ongoing storylines all weaving in and out of each other without any concern for how the audience is keeping up.

It should've been a total mess ... and for a lot of viewers, it was a total mess. Still, it's amazing how consistent every character's motivations are, how every decision checks out even on further scrutiny. The result is a movie that gets better and better on every rewatch, as you can see just how many fun, subtle character cues are included in every single scene. "At World's End" is cleverly written and densely packed, and it doesn't get enough credit for that.

The film also serves as a fitting, cathartic conclusion for our whole main trio. Jack's arc ends on a powerful note of him choosing his friendship with Will and Elizabeth over his selfish pursuit of immortality; Will gets to free his dad and finally marry Elizabeth (in the most romantic, ridiculous wedding scene in film history), winning himself some happiness even if his new Flying Dutchman gig's a bit of a downer. Elizabeth also shines here, no longer just embracing the pirate life but rising to the rank of King of the Brethren Court. No wonder the fourth and fifth "Pirates" films feel so hollow; every character we cared about got a fitting, satisfying ending in "At World's End." It was mean of Disney to force any other movie to try to follow this one.