rumnether - Tumblr blog

rumnether · 13 days ago

Text

Thoughts on James Norrington in At World's End

I recently had a great discussion with @writerxwren, about James Norrington’s arc in At World's End. Her thoughtful comments inspired me to reflect more deeply on his role in the trilogy, and I wanted to share my thoughts in this post.

First of all, I want to say how much I appreciated the depth and thoughtfulness of her comments. She brought up some fascinating points, particularly regarding Jack Davenport’s incredible nonverbal acting, the potential of deleted scenes, and the broader structure of the film. Her insights gave me a lot to think about, and I’d like to share both my perspective on some of the ideas she mentioned and my personal reflections on James’s arc.

One of the points writerxwren raised was how much Jack Davenport’s nonverbal acting added depth to James’s character. I completely agree—Davenport’s ability to convey so much through subtle expressions and body language is remarkable. It’s one of the reasons why James feels so human and relatable, even when he’s making questionable decisions.Looking at his role across the trilogy, James was always more than just a rival or secondary character. In The Curse of the Black Pearl, his love for Elizabeth gave him emotional depth, and his decision to give Jack Sparrow a day’s head start showed that he wasn’t a man bound by rigid rules. He already had the capacity to weigh morality against duty, which makes it clear that his arc wasn’t just about blindly following orders and learning to rebel. In Dead Man’s Chest, his fall from grace added layers to his character, showing a man struggling with humiliation, regret, and the desire to reclaim his honor. However, while his journey in this film is compelling, it also sets up questions about his internal conflict that are not fully resolved in At World's End.

While At World's End had the opportunity to build on James’s complexity, I feel that his arc was ultimately underutilized. Instead of continuing to explore his internal conflict—especially his feelings about serving Beckett after giving him so much power—the film focuses more on advancing other characters’ arcs, like Elizabeth’s rise as a leader and Bootstrap Bill’s subjugation. James’s role as a narrative tool in At World's End feels like a step back compared to how integral he was in the first two films. Personally, I would have loved to see a scene where James reflects on his decision to give the heart to Beckett or how he feels about returning to society after his disgrace.

Another missed opportunity in At World's End is the lack of a final interaction between James Norrington and Jack Sparrow. Their dynamic of rivalry, which for me balanced respect, wit, and conflict, was a key highlight of the first two films. An exchange in the third film could have provided closure to their relationship, especially considering how they both represent different approaches to freedom and morality.

These moments could have made his eventual sacrifice feel like a culmination of his journey, rather than a narrative necessity to push others’ stories forward.In addition, I personally find the execution of James’s death disappointing. While I appreciate the symbolism behind his final act—refusing to serve Davy Jones and setting Elizabeth free—it feels rushed and lacking in emotional weight. The lack of meaningful buildup, especially through interactions with Davy Jones or Elizabeth earlier in the film, diminishes the impact of his sacrifice. Moreover, his death at the hands of Bootstrap Bill, a character with whom he has no personal connection, feels more like a way to emphasize Bootstrap’s descent into madness than a fitting end for James.

Writerxwren also highlighted how certain deleted scenes could have enriched James’s arc. For instance, she mentioned the scene in Dead Man’s Chest where James retrieves his sword, as well as the extended scene in At World's End where Weatherby Swann tries to stab Davy Jones’s heart. I agree that both scenes add depth to their respective characters, but I chose not to reference them because they didn’t make it into the final cut. While the scene with Weatherby Swann is particularly powerful—showing his desperation to save his daughter and highlighting his moral courage—it was ultimately removed, likely altering the intended impact of his character’s death. Similarly, the scene with James retrieving his sword in Dead Man’s Chest could have provided earlier insight into his internal conflict, but its placement in the third film changes its meaning and shifts the focus. Although I appreciate the potential of these moments, I’ve focused on the final version of the films as they were presented to audiences, as I believe this reflects the definitive story the filmmakers wanted to tell.

In another comment, writerxwren brought up an interesting perspective on whether James could have aligned with the pirates in the final battle. She noted that some fans feel James would have been too "straight-laced" to join them fully, likely due to his regret over his time among them in *Dead Man’s Chest*. While I understand this perspective, I believe it’s possible to imagine a temporary, strategic alliance.

In Dead Man’s Chest, we already see him reluctantly working with Elizabeth and Jack Sparrow, and doing so again could have shown his growth as someone capable of pragmatic decisions for a greater purpose, without compromising the principles he still holds dear.

Finally, I want to emphasize that this is just my personal interpretation of James’s arc. I understand and respect fans who see his journey as complete or have different views of James character, as they focus on the positive aspects of his scenes in At World's End.

Overall, I think James Norrington’s arc in At World's End had great potential but ultimately feels incomplete. Reflecting on his journey has only deepened my appreciation for one of the most complex and human figures in the trilogy.

#james norrington #random thoughts #at world's end #potc

11 notes · View notes

rumnether · 13 days ago

Text

I found your post really thought-provoking, especially your reflections on At World's End and James Norrington. While I appreciate the ambition of the film, At World's End isn’t my favorite of the trilogy. Personally, I feel that some subplots and character arcs, including James’s, weren’t explored as thoroughly as they could have been. That said, I wanted to share my perspective on his journey and how I feel it could have been handled differently:

First, I don’t entirely agree with the representation of James as someone who blindly follows orders in At World's End. To me, that part of his journey was already addressed in the first film, where he chooses to let Will and Elizabeth go and gives Jack Sparrow a day’s head start. Those moments showed that James was capable of questioning the system and following his own sense of morality when it mattered. For this reason, his rebellion against Beckett in the third film doesn’t feel like a major evolution of his character, but rather a continuation of a trait we already saw in him.

Additionally, I feel the film missed an opportunity to explore James’s inner conflict before he encounters Elizabeth. When he helps her escape, it’s implied that he regrets having delivered the heart of Davy Jones to Beckett, but this remorse is never explicitly addressed or developed. Showing how James grappled with this regret and how it shaped his decisions in the film would have added much more depth to his arc.

James Norrington has always been one of my favorite characters, and while I appreciate the ambition of At World's End, I feel like his narrative arc remains incomplete. After the events of the second film, where he falls from grace and delivers Davy Jones’s heart to Beckett, the third film doesn’t explore the emotional consequences of that choice. It would have been fascinating to see James grapple with his return to society, especially under Beckett’s control. How does he reconcile his sense of duty with his disillusionment? Does he regret handing Beckett such immense power? These unanswered questions leave his arc feeling unresolved, at least to me.

While I like his final act of refusing to join Davy Jones’s crew, I think it wasn’t built up adequately. There’s little interaction between James and Davy Jones before this moment, which makes the impact of his refusal weaker than it could have been. Additionally, the way his sacrifice plays out suggests that James has lost all hope for himself. This interpretation is incredibly tragic, and while it has emotional weight, I personally would have loved to see his arc conclude with a realization that, despite his disillusionment, he could find a new purpose. Redemption doesn’t have to come through sacrifice alone—it can also come through rebuilding and moving forward.

Another issue is that his death happens too early in the film, well before the final battle. This diminishes its narrative weight and makes it feel more like a tool to advance the arcs of Bootstrap Bill and Elizabeth than to give James a proper resolution. Had his death occurred during the final battle, or at a more pivotal moment, it might have had a greater emotional impact.

Another missed opportunity in At World's End, at least from my perspective, was the lack of a scene between Norrington and Jack Sparrow. Behind the apparent disdain they show for one another lies a fascinating dynamic of rivalry, respect, and mutual understanding. In the earlier films, we see glimpses of how they begrudgingly recognize each other’s strengths, and one final interaction in the third film could have deepened their relationship. It would have been a powerful moment to highlight how far both characters had come, reflecting on their differences and their unexpected similarities. Of course, this is just my interpretation—others might not see their dynamic the same way or feel it was necessary for the story.

Beyond James’s arc, I also found some of the other subplots in At World's End less satisfying. For instance, the Brethren Court had so much potential to explore the relationships between the pirate lords, but it felt rushed and underdeveloped. Similarly, Sao Feng’s story was intriguing at first, but his character arc is cut short, leaving his motivations and history largely unexplored. These are just a couple of examples where the film introduced fascinating ideas but didn’t fully deliver on them.

While I can appreciate the creativity and ambition behind At World's End, I personally feel that the execution didn’t live up to its potential. The film introduces many fascinating ideas and subplots, but I think some of them were underdeveloped or overshadowed others, leading to an overall lack of balance.

That’s just how I see it, though—I completely understand why you and others might find it brilliant and enjoy its storytelling. It’s always great to hear different perspectives on this trilogy, and I really appreciate the opportunity to share mine in response to your thoughts.

At World's End Meta Post

One of the things I love about the og POTC trilogy is how you can catch so many details you never noticed before on every subsequent rewatch. Any time I think I've picked up on everything I'm proven wrong, and I think it's especially true for the 2nd and 3rd movies. So here's a collection of more things I noticed on my most recent rewatch of AWE:

-AWE has always been my favorite of the first 3 films, and I think a strong case can be made for it actually being the best one, although most people usually give that designation to COTB. There's several reasons for this, but I think the most important one is that it takes the story beyond its adventure roots and does something truly profound with it. This is a pirate movie that is not actually about pirates. It's instead about the human drive to fight for and defend our freedom, filtered through the lens of a fantasy adventure involving pirates. The entire film is packed with references to this theme right from the opening scene. This alone I think makes it timeless as opposed to a product of its time, because there is no day and age where that theme will not be relevant.

-There is a fascinating parallel between Beckett and Elizabeth that especially sticks out in this movie. We know Beckett has read up on pirate lore just as much as Elizabeth has, and they both have decent working knowledge of it despite initially being outsiders to that world. The difference between them, though, is how they use that knowledge. Beckett seeks to use it so that he can control and obliterate the pirates, while Elizabeth, despite her repeated insistence that she's "had it with pirates," ultimately uses it to understand them and integrate into their way of life. Beckett becomes their number one adversary, while Elizabeth literally becomes their king and leader.

-I consider the deleted scene where Weatherby Swann tries to stab Davy's heart canon; I don't think it should have been cut out of the film. It adds so much context to why Beckett had him killed, and it fleshes out Norrington's character more in a way that I think was needed before his death. It's very obvious by the end of that scene that Norrington, despite having lived his life following orders (as Beckett himself points out), harbors great disdain for Beckett and his methods. Norrington's flaw in this film is at first assuming that the system he has dedicated his life to serving still upholds the honorable ideals and and values he believes in. This is the scene where we see doubt start to creep in about what he's really serving. There is a part of him that is beginning to realize that his ideals and the people/institution he works for no longer align, which then sets up his eventual turn later on in the film.

-Which leads me to his death. Yes, I hate it because I love him and he's my favorite character. But I also kind of love it because of what it implies. Norrington has spent his life doing what Beckett says he always does: obey. But prior to his death and following the revelation about Weatherby's murder, his "obey without question" mentality finally breaks. When he sets Elizabeth and the pirates free, he is disobeying direct orders for the first time. This is because he's realized that following orders does not always equal doing the right thing, especially when those giving the orders are doing so out of selfishness, pride, and cruelty meant to control the lives of others and take away their freedom. He finally recognizes that doing the right thing sometimes requires rebelling against the established order rather than adhering to it, and when he stabs Davy rather than accept his offer to serve on the Dutchman, that's his final act of rebellion. While I do think there may have been a way to let him live while still giving him this character development (lord knows there's plenty of fanfics to prove this, including my own lol) I love the fact that when he dies, he dies a free man. He is neither a slave to Beckett's greed nor a slave to Davy's cruelty. He's arguably not even a slave to death, because he greets it with humble acceptance rather than fear.

-When Barbossa is giving his speech to the Brethren Court, the camera focuses on Elizabeth during the bit about taming the seas with "the sweat of our brows and the strength of our backs." She later borrows this phrase for her "Hoist the Colors" speech prior to the final battle, and the camera then focuses on Barbossa while she's saying it.

-Jack choosing to sacrifice his shot at immortality to save Will's life has always been one of my favorite parts of the movie. One of the things I realized about it this time is that it connects back to yet another deleted bit where he tells Beckett "people aren't cargo, mate" during their first confrontation. If you know the lore, this is, of course, referencing how Jack freed a slave ship in the past, which Beckett punished him for by branding him a pirate. Jack has always valued his own freedom, but beyond that I think he just values freedom in general. His backstory is proof of that. I think that thanks to his past experiences, in that moment before he has Will stab Davy's heart, he's reminded that while immortality would technically buy him the freedom he wants for himself, personal freedom isn't worth it if it comes at the expense of innocent people's lives.

-I've noticed this before, but I have to point out again how much I love the foreshadowing of Will becoming Captain of the Dutchman, and the parallel between him and Elizabeth and Davy and Calypso. The camera almost always focuses on him when the heart is being mentioned, and Tia Dalma is usually hovering in the background like she knows what his fate is going going to be. The camera also focuses often on Will and Elizabeth together when Davy and Calypso are mentioned, further establishing the parallel. Although they go through a rough patch where they doubt their trust in one another, they're eventually able to rebuild it in a way their predecessors never could. They come together as one while Davy and Calypso tore each other apart. They embody loyalty while Davy and Calypso embody betrayal.

Anyway I'm running out of space but I've said it before and I'll say it again: the writing in the first 3 films was more brilliant than we give it credit for and I think that brilliance really shines in the 3rd one.

#james norrington #potc #Norrington death thoughts #awe critique #replying #at world's end

70 notes · View notes