Recently I rewatched the original Pirates of the Caribbean trilogy (if you haven't noticed from my latest posts), and it really holds up: complex and sophisticated plotting, iconic characters with sturdy arcs, and nuanced themes about honor and freedom.

This trilogy did so many things right. It's no surprise it was a huge hit. (Do they even make movies like this anymore?)

While I could go on long about everything that it does right, today I actually want to zoom in on what I consider its weakest element: Davy Jones's Locker.

This is one (1) scene in the whole trilogy, but it's always felt off and just . . . weird to me. To the extent that it sort of taints my memory of the last film (which, revisiting it again, is actually quite well written).

Don't get me wrong--I get it's meant to be weird.

But it's weird in the wrong way.

It's weird in a weak way.

What could have been a major opportunity to add depth and dimension to the series' themes, and to Jack's character . . .

. . . is nothing but a strange, delusional 8-minute experience that actually could be cut without really affecting the story.

And that's the main problem. It's not doing enough.

Yes, it did what it needed to on the plot level: The point of the scene is to show Jack trapped, slipping into madness in Davy Jones's Locker. It does that.

But it doesn't do that in a resonating way.

Really, if that's all it's doing, the filmmakers could cut the scene and simply show the crew arriving at the Locker to interact with a delusional Jack. (Though I don't quite like that idea either.)

Watching this film again, I realized, on a subconscious level, I always look forward to Davy Jones's Locker because it's a fate Jack spent the whole previous installment trying to avoid. And now he's trapped there.

I also think I subconsciously look forward to it, because it's a scene loaded with opportunity--because this is where we see (or could have seen) Jack in his most vulnerable state. It's begging to be used to develop character and explore the themes.

But instead, we get a (basically filler) madness trip--one that's trying to be comedic yet doesn't quite deliver--and some rock crabs that don't carry enough significance beyond helping move the ship (yes, I get they relate to Calypso. . . . They aren't terrible, but . . . )

Not as satisfying.

Let's go over what could have been done differently, and maybe it will help you with your own less-than-satisfying scenes. . . .

The bones of storytelling are character, plot, and theme.

And the best ideas for your scenes, are going to be those that hit on at least two--or preferably all three--of those.

When you understand that, you can produce more meaningful scenes (and stories).

Digging into Character & Theme to Revise the Scene

One of the most important aspects of any main character is his wants. His motives.

If you've followed me for a while, you may know I refer to this as the "abstract want."

The abstract want (or wants) exists behind nearly every major concrete goal the character pursues in the plot. (Or it should.)

Katniss wants to survive and save others. That's why she aims to win the Hunger Games. That's why she volunteers to take Prim's place and risks her life to save Peeta.

Luke wants to become, or be part of, something great. That's why he plans to go to Academy, become a Jedi, rescue Leia, and destroy the Death Star.

To add depth to a character, it's often a great idea to dig into this abstract want: What does it mean to the character? Why does fulfilling it matter? And how come the character has it in the first place?

In Pirates of the Caribbean, Jack's abstract want is to live free, preferably forever (as I wrote about somewhat recently). This is why he wants The Black Pearl back, and to be its captain, in the first installment. This is why he wants to avoid Davy Jones and the Kraken in the second installment. And this is why he wants to replace Davy Jones in the third installment.

Every major concrete plot goal Jack has, ties back to being free (and alive).

And so do many of his minor ones. ("You will always remember this as the day that you almost caught Captain Jack Sparrow.")

Also noteworthy is that in the first installment, it's said that The Black Pearl symbolizes freedom.

So, having a scene where Jack is trapped in Davy Jones's Locker, with The Black Pearl, would have been the perfect opportunity to explore his abstract want more deeply.

Instead of slipping into madness and envisioning copies of himself on The Pearl, it would have been more meaningful to delve into why freedom matters so much to Jack, and even better, why he has that want in the first place.

Often there is a key backstory (referred to as a "ghost" or "wound") that typically explains the origin of the abstract want.

For example, the reason Katniss wants to survive and save others, is because her dad died and that left her family starving; and after Peeta saved her by throwing her burned bread, she determined she was going to be a survivalist and save her own family.

While Jack's backstory of being marooned by his crew (as told in the first installment), relates to losing freedom (he's trapped on an island, without the Pearl), it doesn't explain the origin of his abstract want (since he wanted freedom via The Black Pearl before that). I don't consider that a flaw, but the Locker would have been an amazing time to go further back into Jack's past and reveal why freedom is so important to him to begin with.

The reason he's trapped in the Locker, is because he made a deal with Davy Jones to raise The Black Pearl (and himself) out of the ocean, so he could be its captain for 13 more years.

That's how much freedom means to Jack. He's literally willing to sell his immortal soul (in addition to working 100 years on The Flying Dutchman) to have 13 years of freedom.

That's a big want.

The trilogy does hint at other aspects of his past, like how he refused to deliver people in the slave trade, and that's why Beckett branded him a pirate in the first place. The writers had the right idea in giving Jack this backstory, as it's ripe with the concept of freedom (vs. bondage). But this is mainly left in subtext. Again, not an innate flaw.

But again, wouldn't it have been great if the film had delved more into that while Jack was in the Locker? Maybe his experience with slaves is what led him to value freedom so highly to begin with.

Or, maybe that was one moment in a whole string of moments that defined his desire. Maybe his abstract want has origins even further back. Maybe as a child, he was somehow trapped, and feared he'd somehow become a slave.

Maybe instead of just having a bunch of copies of Jack in the Locker, we should have had Jacks from different parts of his past--maybe different parts of when he felt trapped. Jack who was marooned. Jack who was imprisoned. Jack who was punished for helping the slaves. Jack who was trapped as a boy.

Surely that would drive Captain Jack Sparrow mad.

The scene would have been so much more interesting if Jack had been haunted by his past. And if the Locker was an opportunity to compound the concept of being trapped.

Naturally, one of the main themes of this film is freedom (vs. bondage): Jack wants to get out of the Locker, Will wants to free his dad, Barbossa wants to release Calypso, and Beckett wants to capture (and kill) all pirates.

So this would have made the film feel more thematically resonant as well. But there are other options too.

The main theme of the whole series explores what it means to be honorable (vs. dishonorable). The nuance (and irony) comes from the fact that pirates, like Jack, ultimately end up being the most honorable. Despite all the (selfish) piracy they engage in, when it comes down it, they're more honorable than Beckett and his men.

And the reason Jack ended up in the Locker at this specific point in time, is because he chose to be honorable, rather than dishonorable, at the climax of the previous film.

Jack could have fled to land and saved himself, letting his crew die, as he'd planned.

But when it got down to it, he couldn't--he came back and saved them.

(. . . before Elizabeth--of all people--betrayed him. . . .)

So this moment in the Locker could have also tapped into the theme of honor (vs. dishonor). It could have questioned if honor was worth it, because look at where it got Jack. Being trapped is likely Jack's worst fear, since it's the opposite of his deepest desire.

For the pirates, the concept of honor comes from keeping the code. Later in the film, we learn that Jack's father is the strict keeper of the code--outright killing a man for even suggesting they don't follow it.

The writers could have delved into that--Jack's relationship with his father, who had always been strict in honoring the code, even when Jack was a young boy. "And look, dad, look at where it [honor] got me!" Jack might've yelled, while wasting away in the sand.

Symbolism & Imagery

But let's say, for some reason, the writers didn't want to do any of that. This is an adventure film, and maybe they didn't want to lean into that directly. They could have worked with more symbolism, tying into character and theme that way instead. The Black Pearl symbolizes freedom, and it's trapped in the Locker. Sure, we get a little bit of symbolism with just that--it's a ship stuck on sand, and it's too heavy for Jack to move.

But there could have been more.

We don't need the rock crabs. Or if we do (to show Calypso helping move the ship), they should have been sea turtles instead--ya know, the creatures that were rumored to free Jack off the island in the first place?! Maybe they should have been used to move the ship (and if we wanted to be silly, with ropes of human hair too 😜).

Or, there could have been more imagery related to being bound--other ropes, chains, cuffs, or bars--driving Jack crazy. Maybe he keeps getting stuck, trapped, or bound somehow.

And rather than these things seemingly randomly moving the ship, Jack should have had a thematic epiphany that apparently led to that, or he should have done something that seemingly caused that to happen (even if it's really revealed it's Calypso later).

In his hallucinations, Jack stabs himself in the heart. We get a brief line about that, but it's not very thematic. If it had tied into one of the themes more, that image would have landed better.

We also get some weird stuff with him eating a peanut, laying an egg, and moving closer to a goat. It's meant to be funny, but it's not very meaningful. Interacting with sea turtles would have been much funnier, since it would have been a callback to the first film. And I get the peanut is meant to emphasize the lack of food . . . but it would have been better if instead, the filmmakers emphasized a lack of rum . . . since that's what he had when trapped on the island, and it was a drink that Elizabeth tied to honor vs. dishonor in the first film (i.e. with a little more work, rum could have been made into a thematic symbol).

Heck, I would have settled for imagery related to Elizabeth "haunting" him--since she's the one who betrayed him, by pretending to reward him for being honorable. Or even traumatic flashbacks of Davy Jones, Jack being eaten by the Kraken, or Jack arriving in the Locker.

That would have aroused more sympathy, for me.

Really, this scene could have been used to emphasize Jack and his vulnerability so much better--rendered in a way that made the audience feel something deeply.

Unfortunately, though, it does little in the way of that.

Now, you would think, based on this post, I positively hate this scene--I don't; it's just a huge missed opportunity.

Yeah, it gets its plot job done.

But it misses out on character and theme.

Regardless, though, this is still a great trilogy.

And despite this post, it's easy to forgive it for fumbling one scene.

Nonetheless, I thought this was a good opportunity to illustrate what character and theme can do for a lackluster scene.

Story isn't just about plot. It's also about character and theme.

If you find a scene lacking luster, you might want to try digging there.