Cranky Eric© sez ... Hey, people who make movies: Stop putting scenes after the closing credits. If you want me to watch it, put it IN THE MOVIE, not after it.

It has been well established that when a list of names starts scrolling up against a black screen, the movie is OVER. You're done. Whatever story you had to tell, you told it. That's the way movies work.

You want to put something cute after the credits, fine. Knock yourself out. A lot of times that stuff is fun. But it doesn't count as an actual part of the story. If it's something we need to know, tell us. Don't hide it after the list of gaffers and production assistants and humane society certifications.

Oh, what, at the end of the last Pirates of the Caribbean -- after the 37 minutes of credits have rolled -- it turns out Elizabeth has a son and is standing around waiting for her once-in-a-decade evening of romance with Will? No she doesn't, and no she isn't. Because the movie ended 37 minutes earlier, when the closing credits started. Whatever happens after that is just you horsin' around. Doesn't count. It's not canon.

Yesterday, Eric D. Snider mentioned an interesting exercise by The New Republic's Christopher Orr. Annoyed at the recent glut of trailers that give away the entire film, he decided to write a review of 21 (which hits theaters today) based only on the trailer. Eric thought the "review" was actually pretty accurate, and I agree. I also agree that the trailer is egregiously inconsiderate of people who'd have liked to go into the movie unspoiled at least as to the third act. It's a shame.

But I'm sure you agree that it doesn't have to be that way. Trailers don't have to give away the game, and they don't have to be tacky and ham-fisted either. They're a marketing tool, of course, but trailers are also -- or can be -- an art form in their own right. Sometimes a trailer is such a skillful composition of images, sounds, words and music that it winds up having more of an effect on me than the movie I'm in the theater to see. (Often, too, the trailer turns out to be better than the movie it's advertising, which is always a disappointment.)

So while yesterday Eric asked you for examples of trailers that pissed you off because they revealed too much, I'd like to know which recent trailers you've loved. Not necessarily which ones you think advertised their movie in the optimal way, but which ones have been great in themselves -- scary, rousing, moving, beautiful. Take a look at some of my favorites and sound off after the jump.

Now that Gore Verbinski seems to be finished with Pirates, I guess he's getting a little anxious about securing himself a new franchise. The Hollywood Reporter announced that Verbinski is getting into the animation business, and he is still assembling his team for the yet to be named film. So far, some of the designers include; visual effects specialist Mark "Crash" McCrery and story and storyboard artist James Ward Bruit. Both men are veterans from the Pirate films, so there won't be a need for any introductions. Verbinski has yet to decide if he will be handling the animation work in-house, and is waiting to see what he has to work with once the script is completed.

The film has a projected budget of around $100 million and has a first look deal with Warner Bros. (thanks to Verbinski's producing partner, Graham King). The two met through screenwriter John Logan (Sweeney Todd), who had worked with King on The Aviator (even more proof that it's who you know in Hollywood). Logan is already in talks to pen the screenplay, but so far there are no details on the story. All we do know is that the flick will be of the action-adventure variety. But that isn't stopping Verbinski from pitching the idea of built in sequels to whatever Logan comes up with. Then again, it's not like it really matters, this is the guy who made a billion dollar franchise out of a crappy theme park ride. Verbinski's untitled animated extravaganza is expected to be released in 2010.

No source knows Disney better than Jim Hill Media, which is why anyone interested in the future of the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise should pay attention to this new info. Actually, some of it is not that new -- you may remember a couple months back when Keira Knightley told reporters that she had no intention of returning to the series for a fourth film -- well, Hill reports that the current thinking inside the house of mouse for how to proceed with an inevitable fourth Captain Jack adventure would not involve either the Elizabeth or Will characters, who were so neatly wrapped up in the button at the end of the last film. Their show is wrapped. The fourth film, according to Hill, will "toss the Elizabeth and Will characters over the side in favor of doing a bawdy buddy picture which would star Jack Sparrow and Barbossa. Where both captains of the Black Pearl would initially be competing for the exact same prize."

"Eventually, all the double crossing would have to stop as these two rivals were then forced to join forces in order to defeat some supernatural terror," Hill says, going on to speculate on a possible problem with the Pirates franchise and the National Treasure franchise both wanting to pursue a 'fountain of youth' story in their next installment. "Wouldn't it be funny if -- when Benjamin Gates arrived at the Fountain of Youth -- he then found Captain Jack Sparrow and Barbossa?" Hill asks. "It could be the Disney version of Alien vs. Predator." Not likely. And anyway, who are they going to replace Keira Knightley with in this next film? If I'm going to be watching another three hours of poor CGI and sitcom-level humor, they better have some saucy wenches for me to look at.

[via IGN]

At the press junket for Atonement in Manhattan on Tuesday, one brave soul piped up during the roundtables to ask Keira Knightley if she was or was not interested in returning for a fourth Pirates of the Caribbean film. You may remember that the third one ended on that rather ambiguous note, but then sort of doubled-back with a pretty definitive, boxed-into-a-corner end-credit teaser. Knightley seemed to be ready for this question and had a very definitive answer. She quickly responded, with a tone of sadness and seriousness in her voice, "I can't imagine doing another one. That was an amazing experience, really was, totally extraordinary, but I think three for me is probably enough." This was probably to be expected. The Pirates series is subject to the same industry realities as the X-Men series -- the more money those movies make, the bigger the paychecks the cast members are going to demand for future installments. I think you can almost certainly say goodbye to Elizabeth Swann and Will Turner.

Regarding her other projects, Knightley reported that she has completed her work on The Duchess, as well as The Edge of Love, opposite Sienna Miller and Cillian Murphy. As far as future work, she had nothing to report on that front. Another interesting note: although Knightley showed up bright-eyed and bushy-tailed for today's junket along with her co-star James McAvoy, director Joe Wright was a no-show despite being in Manhattan as recently as last night. Joe, are you sick of us press people already?

As you're no doubt aware by now, I'm a big fan of the Pirates of the Caribbean trilogy. At this point, you either love the series or you're completely disinterested in the franchise, so I'm guessing this DVD review is meant for the "already fans." We'll start off with some material from my original review of the film, then some thoughts after my second third time with the flick, and then we'll finish off with a blow-by-blow on the DVD goodies. (The DVD hits the shelves on December 4 in a solo-disc or dual-platter format. This review covers the two-disc special edition, which is scheduled to go "into Disney moratorium" as of September 2008.)

Sometimes the big-time franchise makers are damned if they do and damned if they don't: Churn out a skimpy "Part 3" that just rehashes what was offered in Parts 1 & 2 and you've got something vaguely entertaining but clearly inferior like Shrek the Third. Try too hard to jam too many arbitrary plot threads and flimsy characters into your third entry and you're stuck with a lurching behemoth like Spider-Man 3. And then you have the middle ground: The sprawling, gorgeous and massive adventure epic Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End, which while far from a flawless film, aims to stay faithful to its predecessors while still upping the ante (a lot) with a boat-load of new plot developments, characters and surprisingly nifty subtext. Yep, this particular popcorn movie runs almost three full hours, but if producer Jerry Bruckheimer and director Gore Verbinski had produced a quick-buck 92-minute third chapter, then the complaints would be legion. You can't win. Except at the box office, obviously.

Imagine a villain who's like a female Darth Vader, only more evil, and she'll invoke the worst nightmares for children since the Child Catcher from Chitty Chitty Bang Bang. This is how Guardian critic Peter Bradshaw has described Nicole Kidman as Mrs. Coulter in his review of The Golden Compass (aka His Dark Materials: Northern Lights, as it's titled in the UK), which he's given a rating of four stars. As if that's not appealing enough, he also claims the character is Kidman's "juiciest" role since To Die For. According to Bradshaw, it seems Kidman is the main reason to see the movie. His only other highlight is the look of the movie's universe, which he calls "wonderful" and "Gilliamesque." He also points out how it's obvious the movie is aiming for association with Star Wars, The Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter and The Chronicles of Narnia. Well, that isn't very surprising.

For a "four star" movie, The Golden Compass, according to Bradshaw, sounds like a mess plot-wise. Aside from looking nice, the movie's universe is apparently "crowded" and "alienating" and the audience is expected to get used to it as best it can, despite a lot of missing background material included in the book. Also, it's apparently more "absurd" than the source novel. Of course, confusing plots and universes aren't always a bad thing to audiences -- just look at the Pirates of the Caribbean series. What could be bad for the movie's box office is its violence; Bradshaw claims a significant polar bear battle could be too much for younger viewers. I have a good feeling that other critics will be less favorable considering the faults that this review seems to address, but of course even with terrible reviews, The Golden Compass could be a hit -- again, just look at the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise.

As much as I disapprove of most remakes, I don't really have an issue with Akira Kurosawa's films being redone. The thing is, Kurosawa was a master of remakes, having continually reworked John Ford and Shakespeare. And in turn, his films have been remade as or have influenced later classics, like The Magnificent Seven and Star Wars. Sure, it's worth complaining about The Weinstein Co. remaking The Seven Samurai, because, well, it's The Weinstein Co. But I see little issue with the news, courtesy of The Hollywood Reporter, that Japanese studio Toho, which produced the original, is working on a redo of The Hidden Fortress. This is the film, after all, that is constantly cited as the basis for Star Wars, and if it's good enough in the hands of George Lucas, it could be good enough in the hands of special effects wizard-turned-director Shinji Higuchi (The Sinking of Japan). Cast as General Makabe, the part originated by the legendary Toshirô Mifune, is super-tall (for his country) actor Hiroshi Abe (Godzilla 2000). The part of Princess Uehara will be played by Masami Nagasawa (Godzilla: Final Wars).

One issue that Kurosawa fans may have with this remake, and The Hollywood Reporter already points this out, is that the two comical peasant characters, Tahei and Matashichi, are being condensed into one character called "Takezo". The character will still serve the same function, with his point of view being the film's perspective, but unless he talks to himself a lot, he just won't be the same. Aside from inspiring R2-D2 and C-3PO, Tahei and Matashichi have obviously influenced other pairings, including the recent characters Ragetti and Pintel from the Pirates of the Caribbean movies. Perhaps Toho believes we've seen enough of such duos? The new singular version, "Takezo", will be played by Jun Matsumoto, best known as a member of the boy band Arashi.

Hi-Ho Silver, bring me lots of money! According to the Hollywood Insider, Terry Rossio and Ted Elliott, the pens behind Pirates of the Caribbean, are trying to cook up a draft of The Lone Ranger for Jerry Bruckheimer to turn into the latest cash cow. Yes, the old masked ranger who rides a white horse, righting wrongs with the help of Tonto. Sure, remakes of old stories, even radio classics, are all the rage, but is a cowboy on a horse going to rake in the cash for Bruckheimer and Disney? Could this really be true?

According to the report, the studio won't confirm the assignment, so they can only go by their sources, and as HI describes it, the writing duo is "trying to create a new juggernaut for Bruckheimer to exploit." Sure, they made pirates all the rage, but can they do the same with cowboys? It doesn't seem to be one of those areas that gets tons of mileage, at least, not in the wide world of kids and marketing. I guess if anyone could do it, it's this team, but still. Cowboys and Indians? Can they really pull it off?

As HI says, the concept hasn't been as popular as it used to be. After the '50s television show, there was a 1981 film flop, and more recently, the WB tried to get a television version off the ground with Chad Michael Murray. It's really too bad that that project didn't even make it to the boob tube -- CMM as the Ranger would've amused me. So there you have it, the Lone Ranger might hit the big screen once again, under the powerful arm of Bruckheimer. Does that scare you? Excite you? Or maybe make you feel a little queasy?

Chemistry -- you can be the best filmmaker, writer or actor, but nothing makes up for a lack of that intangible connection between two people. This is probably why so many actors can't keep up long relationships -- they continually get paired up with people they have great chemistry with and are weakened by temptation over and over until they can't help but break the ties that bind and go libidinously nuts. Oh, the devilish temptation! But on the flip-side, there are pairings that are just plain crappy -- painfully free of that interest and attraction that comes from the eyes. The CBC has reported that British cinema advertisers Pearl and Dean recently conducted a survey asking 3,000 movie-goers which duos have the worst on-screen chemistry, and came up with a list of the 10 worst offenders.

The top spots are no big surprise, really -- the 5th went to Catherine Zeta Jones and Sean Connery in Entrapment, the 4th to Madonna and Adriano Giannini in Swept Away, Keira Knightley and Orlando Bloom got the third spot with the Pirates of the Caribbean trilogy, the runners up were the rockin' Bennifer pair for Gigli and the top spot went to Natalie Portman and Hayden Christensen with Episode II: Attack of the Clones. I'd say they're pretty spot on, although my top offender are the two that hold that third spot, and I'm glad I'm not the only one that thinks so. Granted, Johnny Depp can whip up some chemistry with almost anyone, which makes it hard to compete, but man, I hated Knightley and Bloom together. This also made many parts of the final film truly annoying, if you get my drift. Also, you've got to question your real-life couple choices when you can't cook up chemistry at work, with your significant other.

Finishing the list, there's Hugh Grant and Andie MacDowell in the 6-spot with Four Weddings and a Funeral, Ben Affleck appeared again at 7 with Kate Beckinsale for Pearl Harbor, Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman got 8 with Eyes Wide Shut, Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllenhaal followed with Brokeback Mountain and Titanic got the final, 10th spot, with stars Kate Winslet and Leonardo DiCaprio. Who would you pick?

While it's true that you probably won't find a bigger Pirates of the Caribbean geek than yours truly, even I'll admit that the third one kinda ... sagged in the middle just a little bit. It took me a full three viewings before I really noticed it, but it really felt like the movie was missing one medium-sized action scene at the mid-section...

Meh, seems a rather nit-picky thing to gripe about, considering how enjoyable I found the rest of the trilogy. My well-worn copies of Curse of the Black Pearl and Dead Man's Chest reside next to a slim rectangular hole where the third DVD goes, and it looks like December 4th is when that void will be filled by an At World's End 2-disc mega-set. Disney just announced the full specs for the two releases, so we turn to DavisDVD.com for the booty list...

Oh yeah: The single-discer will deliver audio commentary and a blooper reel, but for all the extra goods you'll have to opt for the 2-platter option. Extras there will include:

• Anatomy of a Scene: The Maelstrom -- The trilogy's climax gets a blow-by-blow treatment. (Sorry if that sounded vulgar.)
• Keith & the Captain -- Johnny Depp and Keith Richards behind the scenes. Should be a blast.
• Tale of the Multiple Jacks -- A breakdown of Depp's trippiest hallucinations since his last trip to Las Vegas.
• Hoist the Colors -- "Reveals the inspiration for the original composition." I'm not sure if that means the musical score or the production design.
• Masters of Design -- Ah, here we are: No less than five mini-documentaries covering five specific sections of the production design.
• Inside the Brethren Court -- A closer look at all the new pirates, from their outfits to their non-fictional counterparts.
• The Pirate Code: Revealed -- "Explores the pirate code and the history of piracy." Yeah, but it's a Disney DVD, so don't expect any gory details.
• The World of Chow Yun Fat -- The international star gets a featurette all his own.
• The Pirate Maestro: The Music of Hans Zimmer -- And here's the musical bit. Cool.

Obviously the flick will also be available on "Blu-Ray," which still kinda freaks me out a little. And what fortuitous timing! This DVD hits stores the same month that Christmas arrives. Neat!

Now that Pirates of The Caribbean 3 is becoming a distant memory in the summer blockbuster rush, Keira Knightley fans will just have to wait until the release of her next period drama, Atonement to get their fix. Keira Knightley Daily, is hosting promotional stills from the film, based on the novel by Ian McEwan. It centers on a young girl from an upper class family, with aspirations of becoming a writer, who falsely accuses her older sister's (Knightley) lover of a crime. What follows seems to be long-suffering love, class battles, and regret, all the things that make up a successfully weepy period romance. Oscar-winner Christopher Hampton adapted the book for the screen, and Joe Wright is directing. The cast also includes Saoirse Ronan, Vanessa Redgrave, and James McAvoy as the wronged man. This is the second project for Knightley and director Wright, having already worked together on Pride and Prejudice.

Knightley is also busy finishing up the Dylan Thomas film Edge of Love, and we recently received the somewhat wacky news that she was being considered to play Princess Diana. But since the producer of the Diana project has only made a low-budget horror flick, it seems a little far-fetched to imagine that Knightley would say yes. If you cannot get enough of Knightley's pout, there are also now plenty of new images online from Edge. When put side by side with Atonement's stills, they start to look a little interchangeable -- but at least this set of photos isn't going to spark off a round of litigation. Atonement is set for release in September in the U.K. with a North American release date set for December 7th.

It appears to be a busy week for Ubisoft game titles. Latino Review now has a script review of the big-screen version of Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time for Disney. Since the fate of Disney's other hi-action franchise is still hanging in limbo, Prince of Persia could be their next chance at another blockbuster series. The game has existed in one form of another since 1989, starting on the Apple II and has lasted right up to the latest generation consoles. Rights to the film were bought by action-mogul Jerry Bruckheimer back in 2004, but it took over three years to get a script about a "a brave medieval prince sets out to rescue the kidnapped daughter of the Maharajah and save his realm from certain destruction." And so far, Latino Review seems happy with what they have seen, including a first act that sounds remarkably similar to the opening of the game Sands of Time.

Fans will be happy to know that our acrobatic friend will be in fighting form since the film plans to make use of the French art of Parkour, "the aim of which is to move from point A to point B as efficiently and quickly as possible, using principally the abilities of the human body" -- the most recent example would be the amazing chase scene in Casino Royale, or there is my personal favorite, Nike's The Angry Chicken. IESB had reported that Michael Bay was set to direct the film for a summer release in 2009 just as soon as he was finished with Transformers, but nothing has been confirmed. But, if the script is the real thing, it could mean that maybe the film is just a little closer to becoming a reality.

Sony has accused the Walt Disney Company of bending the rules in announcing the box office totals for Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End. The main issue in question is whether Pirates 3 or Spider-Man 3 brought in the most gold doubloons over its first six days of worldwide release. Sony spokesman Steve Eltzer is claiming that At World's End opened in at least two areas on the previous Tuesday, which would add a seventh day of grosses to what Disney announced as a six-day record. Disney is claiming "we had previews that generated $1.4 million. And in keeping with industry practice, we rolled it into the opening day." I, Patrick Walsh, am claiming that if these people would put as much work into their movies as they do into arguing about insanely trivial financial records, moviegoers would be a hell of a lot happier.

Sony opened Spider-Man 3 on a Tuesday in some territories overseas and announced a "six-day opening record" of $232 million. Disney announced its "six-day opening record" of $251 for Pirates. And both have been grumbling and bickering back and forth ever since. "While there may or may not be other territories that opened prior to Wednesday, we believe that as more day-and-date releases enter the market, there should be a consistent standard in international box office reporting," says Eltzer. "This issue is larger than an opening-week box office statistic." Hear hear! Way to focus on the truly important issues, boys! This is a sad day indeed. I thought Hollywood was supposed to be a world of magical entertainments and childlike wonder, and now we come to find out that these people seem to be most interested in ... money? Who knew?

In a story about this summer's blockbuster franchises and the plans for their continuation, iF Magazine shares this interesting quote from Sony Pictures chairperson Amy Pascal: "If you want the kind of longevity we're hoping for with Spider-Man, you have to think of them as stand-alone movies, not '1-2-3-4'. They're sort of like the James Bond stories." I find this statement quite amusing considering the definite three-part story arc followed in the first few Spider-Man movies. Plus, if Sony didn't mean for us to think of each as a numerical installment, the studio might have wanted to title the sequels differently than Spider-Man 2 and Spider-Man 3. They should have done something more along the lines of The Dark Knight or Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer.

But thinking of the Spider-Man series as being like the 007 franchise would make it okay for Sony to replace Tobey Maguire in the role of Peter Parker/Spider-Man, which could happen if the actor refuses the reported $20 million offer to return. Sony is currently looking for screenwriters to pen Spider-Man 4, though the studio has already been talking with David Koepp, who wrote the first installment, about signing on. Koepp is also responsible for writing the next Indiana Jones movie, a fourth installment in a franchise that does actually consist of stand-alone parts. Whoever is hired for the script, though, it may, according to Pascal's statement, be more of a one-shot rather than the beginning of another trilogy (the studio is apparently interested in at least three more films). Perhaps they can title it one of the following number-less suggestions: Spider-Man: Maximum Carnage; Spider-Man and the Lizard's Tale; Doc Octopussy. Or, if they re-cast and reboot, a la The Incredible Hulk: The Amazing Spider-Man; The Spectacular Spider-Man; Web of Spider-Man; etc.