shaodyn this was AWE, Jack was ready to, if he couldn’t complete the task Jones gave him, then his only other option was to offer up 100 innocent souls... So having a scene of “Im a pirate, cause I’m against the slave trade” and then... “Yeah, lets go get 100 innocent people and practically sell their souls to servitude”
The way the line “People aren’t cargo, mate” was said, really good acting. Captain Jack Sparrow looks up a little bit with a look of both anger annoyance, and his tone is a bit bitter. He literally stops what he’s doing just to rethink what he did in the past, and he doesn’t regret it. He is a pirate and he’s proud of it. He has got to be one of the best pirates I’ve ever seen.
@@benjackson5411 He kinda is. Pirates were degenerates in history but there is a freedom fighter aspect of it. They are rebels against the rich, capitalism, imperialism. They were harming these, that's why they were ended, for standing against the system. Not for morality or anything, because what they stood against were also immoral.
The movies always showed that Jack Sparrow is a great person, i am not surprised, he just tricks the villains into thinking he'll team up with them to save his friends and then defeat the enemies
Another reason why this scene should have been kept is because in the end of Dead Mans Chest when the crew go see Tia Dalma you see a lot of people holding candles in the swamp and mourning Jacks death. They were the slaves that he freed. It used to confuse me for years until I found out about this deleted scene.
Grindelwald really screwed the life part in his movie in the Wizardry world. If he became an sailor in the Wizardry world he'll be Sinbad freeing wizards from branded as villains from their mage masters.
With this line and "People Aren't Cargo Mate", we really could have had a full picture of Jack's character; his unquenchable desire for freedom. There are probably few things that scream freedom quite as loudly as your own ship, and the open sea
Who knew Commodore Norrington's remark about Captain Jack's "one good deed" would not be explained until 2 movies later, and only in a deleted scene at that. At first we just thought the "good deed" was just referring to saving Elizabeth's life.
"Your good deed cost me, Jack." "And you have spared me of any possibility of ending up as anything other than what I am. And for that, I truly thank you." Beckett lost money and status. People like Beckett think it is a huge loss, but it's not. They are so caught up in their own world they don't realize that these can be regained if opportunity strikes again. He continues to feel humiliated about it even after 10 years. Proof that Beckett is just like a child throwing a tantrum. Jack lost the ability to choose his own fate. Jack can not become anything else. He is and will always be a pirate, whether he wants to be or not. But he accepts it, turns what should hurt him into his greatest asset. If he can only be a pirate, he will be the best one ever.
It sucks that the 5th movie kind of retcons the idea of Jack not always being a pirate and the brand upon him for freeing slaves is something he can only be in life. Jack wanted freedom for himself and others, piracy itself is a sense of freedom because those who commit feel they're obligated to abide by the law
What's neat about that line is how PISSED Beckett sounds when he says it. Most of the time, Beckett's lines are delivered with a confident smugness, indicating how much he enjoys lording (pun intended) his authority over others. But here, he's mad. Just goes to show you how much Jack's good deed was an insult to him.
This movie was way too long as it was, but I still wish they'd kept this scene. I know part of Jack's appeal is that he's kind of morally ambiguous, but his quiet and subdued "People aren't cargo, mate," could have been the perfect and simplest way to show the viewers exactly the kind of person he truly is. He puts on a goofy, carefree facade, but in the end he's got a good heart that cares about other people. I wish they'd taken the extra moment to show that.
Supreme Overlorde not only that, but it adds to the backstory of jack sparrow. We never did hear the reason why Beckett and jack hate each other, what the betrayal was, and how jack came to make a deal with jones to save the pearl.
The reason they cut this is because it shows Jack can be selfless to help others. They wanted people to question if Jack would choose immortality or to save Will and Will's father.
This scene was crucial to understanding Jack and they took it out. Other scenes could've been taken out and even within this scene, there's just seconds worth of it that are actually needed. Editing saved big movies, but it can equally fuck things up.
"People aren't cargo, mate." Those four words are ultimately what set the first 3 films in motion to begin with. Freeing slaves = branded as a pirate, ship sunken beneath the waves, Beckett's grudge. Sunken ship = deal with Jones and future piracy. Piracy = Barbossa, mutiny, and the curse. Mutiny and the curse = Will and Elizabeth's involvement, and Will Senior's enslavement to Jones. Beckett's grudge against Jack = seeking out what Jack's been involved with over the years, including Davy Jones' existence and cursed heart. All culminating in the events of this film because of Jack's good deed.
Put a whole new meaning on him telling Elizabeth that he likes to wave at chances to do the right thing as they pass by. He did it once. It didnt end well
He also got marooned on an island which drove him a little mad as to why his personality is so bonkers. Some people complain about the dream sequence in at world's end but I didn't mind too much because his crazy mind was a result of that marooning
This scene tells us so much more than the final cut did, and should have been kept. "People aren't cargo, mate" is one of the most important lines ever to be spoken by him because it not only shows Jack's true character that we rarely get to see, but it explains so much about his past and their relationship together and does it in such a small space. Rather than being vague about it like in the final cut, that line says exactly what it means and makes it all the more powerful in contrast to the innuendous and fakely formal conversation they have for the rest of the scene.
The scene is great, greater, I think, and any scene that ever made it into any of the movies. Unfortunately, it doesn't make any sense... It's a complete 180 on everything we know about Jack's character. In the second movie, Jack starts out literally rounding up a crew in order to trade them to Davy Jones for his soul, and even betrays Will, his own trusted friend who has risked his life to save Jack before, and he does this without a second thought or shred of remorse. We are expected to believe that this is the character of a man who freed slaves on principle???
Jack and Beckett have a deep history. Jack was suppose to deliver a cargo (of 100 slaves) to becket from Africa but he chose to free them instead and in return, Beckett burned Jack's ship, The Pearl, and branded him as a pirate. Jack asked Davy Jone to bring back his ship. Jones agreed for 100 souls (referring to the 100 ones he sent free). That's why Jack owes Jones 100 soul (said in the second movie) and why in their scene they showed his brand at 0:23
His ship was originally named The Wicked Wench. After he made his deal with Davy Jones it was raised from the depths and renamed The Black Pearl. I read the novel Pirates of the Caribbean: Price of Freedom. It is a good read and I highly recommend it. It answers many questions.
_a scene that expands a character's backstory and his relationship with the antagonist_ Studio: We don't do that here. _Elizabeth pulls a gun out of a questionable place_ Studio: *Real shit!*
that's why the third movie felt so weird like it had a bunch of holes in it, they cut out many scenes. actually, all three movies did, the first one also had many great scenes cut out that showed more of the characters relationships
The second movie did the same where is a scene where master Gibs tells will about davy jones before they meet Calypso and he tells will that jack is not afraid of dying and that davy jones prefers punishment over death ( which explain why jack didnt die by the end of the second movie) deep charcater motives cut out again... or the extended dice game between will and davy jones or like the jack, cutler becket scene in the third movie. With jack saving slaves or for him the black pearl being freedom. and not only jack also in the third movie cut out important scenes for no reasons. Even elizebaths father had a deleted scene where he wants to stab davy jones heart and is stopped by norrington. Instead when Elizabeth saw her father in davy joney locker he tells her about the heart scene we didnt see. Cut out again.... It makes the death less impactfull. I really dont know why they cut out such important things in these 2 movies.
Their feud is very interesting if you read the website bios of these characters. Beckett was obsessed with becoming an elite, he wanted to get the title of “lord”. He worked in logistics for the West African branch of the EIC for over 10 years, and a lord living in the Bahamas promised him land and titles in exchange for slaves. Beckett contracted Jack to deliver the slaves, but Jack liberated them, preventing Beckett from becoming a lord. As payback, Beckett permanently branded Jack as a pirate and burned Jack’s ship, the Wicked Wench, turning the sails black and the hull charcoal. When Jones recreated it, it was rebranded the Black Pearl.
Very well put! I would like to add however: The Wicked Wench didn't get black sails and have the hull be shaded into charcoal until after Jones raised the ship, not before since the wiki also says that Jack jumped into a burning destroyed wreckage of the Wicked Wench and that's where he called upon Davy Jones.
That makes the bit where Elizabeth's father edognises him at the start of the second movie and Beckett corrects him with "yes, Lord now, actually" hit different
“If you’re offering me a seat on the board, I’m neither depraved enough nor drunk enough to accept.” Beckett, reaching for shots: *Let’s change that then...*
Great line ....while shows the true inner-self of Jack: A kinda hearted man, utterly wronged ...and now out to get back at the "man", while enjoying every ...single ...moment. Savvy......
It is a stage of drama. It is the hero coming full circle. You take a pure hero, than you cause him to be "broken via the world" and him to turn against his heroic past out of cynicism, then you cause him in the 2nd movie, the Empire Strike Back movie to have a Fall. Only in the 3rd movie the fallen hero to have a redemption arc. The fallen hero is the hero once again, the old man is now the man who still has the ideals of his youthful self. This is known as monomyth, also known as the hero's journey made famous via Joseph Campbell. You can identify many forms of narrative drama and themes in narrative works where you look at the work as a people playing archetypes, and one of the themes is that people can shift from one archetype, one extreme to another, in order to create the most drama. If your goal is to tell a hero's journey type of story you go from the hero becomes the villain becomes the hero again. Yet in other stories such as teaching kids be wary of strangers you may start with a villain who then does something good and just only to stab you in the back later on. Aka be mindful of traitors, for a traitor once has already shown they are fine with changing their morals and thus have no problem being a twice traitor.
You can really see the hurt in Jack’s eyes and sadness in his voice when he says “People aren’t cargo, mate.” He doesn’t regret freeing the slaves. I always hated Beckett, but I hated him even more when he referred to people as ‘cargo.’
This scene DESPERATELY needed to be in the movie. For as much as people like the fact that it adds the depth to Jack's character, this really provides a lot for Beckett. You see how his mind works, and that he demands control over the situation, because his life is all about maintaining order. He thinks people are simply subjects to be manipulated and contented with goods and services. He's more than willing to play the role of the puppetmaster. But the second he loses control of the situation, i.e. when Jack liberated those slaves, he lost control and it drove him to hunt Jack down.
"Your good deed cost me, Jack." "And you have spared me any possibility of ending up as anything other than what I am. And for that, I truly thank you." I think what was brilliant about what Jack said was that it was guised as that he prefers being a pirate, but it was really him just calmly explaining to Beckett how he destroyed his life. He was a captain under the employ of the East India Trading Company, made a good living, and was content with life. But he saw wrong and sought to correct it, and he was thrown in the lot as being nothing more than a common criminal. His mind basically snapped, which would explain his erratic nature. It really gives true insight into who Jack Sparrow is as a character.
Wow I perceived it differently. For Jack, to be forever branded a criminal if it means freeing 100 slaves, it's a decision worth making. Captain Jack Sparrow has never regretted it.
@@m.032 Huh. Sounds like Dead Men ruined both ideas, unless Dead Men's inconsistent with the overall universe? Cuz Jack supposedly nvr became criminal until branded so by Beckett for freeing 100 slaves. It's been a while since i watched the movies.
I found this scene because of tumblr, why did they take this out?? it explains so much. why jack was branded a pirate, why his debt is 100 souls. damn such a great scene
Moreover, it would be confusing if viewers never read the backstory. "People not cargo" would be hard to incorporate into the story given its already massive plot
It also enhances the meaning of the ending where Jack saves Will. Allow me to elaborate: The reason the initial scene was cut was because Gore Verbinski thought it made Jack look like too good of a person and it conflicts with his devious, self-centered nature. But the reason why this should've been kept is this: Jack is a devious, self-centered person BECAUSE he was a good person. He worked for the East India Trading Company, captain of his own ship, making a good living, and content with his life's choices. He adhered to the principles of being an honest citizen as a merchant sailor. But when Beckett asked him to transport 100 slaves, he knew that this was wrong. Acting upon his good conscience, he freed the slaves because it was the right thing to do. His morals trumped his duty for the EITC, and he was a good man for it. But then Beckett brands him a pirate, marking him as nothing more than a common criminal. He destroys his reputation, his livelihood, and his ship. Everything he worked for in life, gone before his very eyes. All because he wanted to do the right thing. Recognizing the hypocrisy of Beckett for labeling him as "evil" despite the very nature of slavery being evil, Jack became a pirate of his own free-will, now that his former life as an honest sailor is in tatters. Doing the right thing cost him everything, so from that point on, he only cares about one person: himself. But when he sees Will dying, he's reminded of the good man he once was. He has a chance at immortality, and he sacrifices it to save a friend. He does the right thing even though he has nothing to gain from it. He's a pirate because he wants to deny his selfless nature, but he can't stop himself because Jack Sparrow is a good man.
jeffairlin rousseau Eh, I don’t think it would show Jack as a “good person” so much as give him some layers. I mean, hell, even straight up *villains* will have that one thing that they can’t and won’t abide by, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that they are good people.
@@theotherghostgirl337 Yeah, everyone has a line that they won't cross. A point where even they will say, "This is going too far, even for me." I do like the interpretation of him being good at heart, too, though.
I hope that the people at Disney studios actually put together extended versions of all three original pirates movies. This scene is so much better in its full form.
There's a lot of talk about Jack's morality... but I can't believe nobody is bringing up the chemistry these two are projecting in this scene. Beckett's leaning so close to Jack when they're negotiating and Jack's leaning right back in. Beckett's practically whispering in his ear. That rare moment of vulnerability for both of them at "people aren't cargo" / "your good deed cost me, Jack." Look at how Beckett laughs at Jack's jokes. That expression on his face when Jack steals his second drink. "You haven't changed." Then this scene carries right on into "What about Miss Swann?" "What is she to you?", and Beckett's smile at those words. Then Jack correctly surmises that what Beckett wants most is Jack (dead), pushing home what an obsession Beckett has with Jack. Seems like Jack's good deed was a real *personal* betrayal to Beckett. How do they know each other so well? What was the nature of their past relationship, exactly? What I'm saying is that Kiera Knightley has nothing like this kind of chemistry in her role with Jack. Tom Hollander's over here playing Beckett like he doesn't know if he wants to kiss Jack or carve out his eyes.
It depends on whose perspective....most pirates were regular sailors that couldn't afford the taxes on most ports and had to turn to crime to make a living
@Alexander Brunnrgaard and how about in term of freedom fight?? What u mean by abiding the law?? And how u see east india company as they plaunder their colonial and kidnap their people for slavering..
It would've made his character too cemented in the moral sense, which wouldn't work for the movie -- he needed to be kept in the line of being a chaotic neutral hero.
@@GamesCooky " Maybe they felt the movie needed to be shorter?" At World's End definitely needed to be a lot shorter, and I can think of like 10 scenes that could have been cut to achieve that if it meant keeping this one.
@@luvahadowsdolls You can still be "chaotic neutral" and have certain ethical lines that you won't cross. Dipping into slavery is definitely a crime against humanity that would turn a chaotic neutral character into neutral evil.
This was a good scene because there was so much more in it than the dialogue. Everything Jack and Beckett do, physically, in this room reflects something about their characters. The little shot of Beckett putting the model ship that Jack messed with back upright. The shot of Jack doing a double take of the heroically-posed portrait of Beckett. The peanut... I also like that Beckett seemed perfectly willing to offer Jack an attractive position in the East India Company despite his personal hatred of the man. He is dedicated to 'good business' above all else. Great character
The scene was deleted because it removes any lingering doubt of Jack's self-serving nature. It was important for the narrative that Jack could cross anyone at any time and serve himself. While the reason why he became a pirate is very cool, it screws up the rest of the film because it becomes clear that he's a good, self-sacrificing soul. That he would give up what he craves most, immortality, for Will Turner, without too much hesitation. That's why it had to be cut, sadly.
You are right on why they cut it out and completely understand their reasons. But sometimes narrative is just as important as character details. They still could have kept that information in while trimming this scene out and keeping everything else intact. It gives Jack Sparrow a more in depth personality something I wished was addressed more as there were certain scenes in the trilogy that did this and did it well.
I don't know, we know from the first movie that he values freedom very much, "what the black pearl really is....is freedom" Also when he didn't shoot will even though he was keeping him from escaping, he's not entirely selfish
I agree....But it atleast shows why he didn't stab jones's heart at the end and gave it to Will. Its shows why Sparrow is a good man rather than a good pirate.
He didn't shoot Will because he was saving that specific bullet for personal revenge. I feel like in 3 Jack had a change of heart (no pun intended) rather than him being good the entire time. He literally sold Will into slavery to save his own skin... His slave-freeing origin doesn't actually make any sense given his actions and character later, which is too bad, because this scene is absolutely awesome...
Actually, with this scene it enhances the ending where Jack saves Will. Jack frees those slaves on impulse, knowing that there's something wrong and he does what he believes is right, and what happens to him afterwards? He's branded a criminal and an outcast from society, and his life as an honest sailor for the EITC dies at that moment. After an experience like that, Jack decides that he doesn't want to be the hero anymore, because it's given him nothing but loss and pain. He resolves to act in self-interest because being selfless only hurt him, and he continues this throughout his life despite his inherently good nature. For him to be on the chosen path of selfishness really heightens Jack's character, because he has no reason to do the right thing again. But he comes around and saves Will's life, because in the end, Jack Sparrow is "a pirate, and a good man."
it’s one thing to have a serious character deliver a line this well. but to have one of the funniest and most comedic characters to just break your heart with this line delivery
Many have pointed out the contrast between Jack's past noble actions (freeing the slaves) and his current self-serving nature. For me, this scene just tells a lot about how his current character developed. In the past, when Jack freed the slaves, he was probably much more idealistic, however being branded as a pirate and being forced to watch his ship burn by Becket lead him to become the more selfish/treacherous person he is now. I think he is hinting this himself with his answer to Becket ("And you have spared me any possibility of ending up as anything other than what I am. And for that I truly thank you"). When Becket punished him for not doing something that was undoubtedly wrong (delivering the slaves), he showed him how corrupt the world truly was, causing Jack to become much more pragmatic and eventually become the character he now is, which is probably why Jack is thanking him.
@@lopamudra5398 true. However the difference is that Beckett MADE Jack that way.He wasn't always so jaded and manipulative. How would you feel if you saved a child from being hit by a drunk driver and then that same person burns your house down and made it look like you did it for the insurance. You'd become a tad self serving and traitorous too
1:46 "And as long as it is delivered on time and in sufficient supply, then they are content to be nothing more than figures on a ledger." Tom Hollander's delivery of that line is superb. Perfect cadence with just the right balance of malice and sophistication. We can tell that Beckett truly believes what he is saying and he believes himself to be superior to everyone else because he has a "noble responsibility" to keep everything running.
Really should have made the cut, explains so much and so well. How jack freed slaves and was branded a pirate so he decided "fuck it, I'll be the best damn pirate ever!" Sold his soul to resurrect his and most loved ship. The origin of the black pearl would also explain its supernatural speed
I really wish they'd left this in the movie. I don't care how much longer it would've been, some of those deleted scenes should've been left alone. Especially when they help tell the story. I wonder how pissed off actors get when they work hard one a scene and then find out it didn't make the cut
Buddy and it's slightly historically accurate too. I think at some point, a good percentage of old pirates were old slaves; and I think you could bet that their liberators might just have the same profession because they have no where else to be after turning traitor against a gargantuan of an Organization like the East Indies Company.
Everyone talking about how he freed slaves, i'm more impressed by the amount of drinking he does in these two minutes 2:16 *1st shot of whiskey* 3:10 *2nd shot* 3:58 *Jack requests a refill* Guy's probably shitfaced by the time he escapes.
There's some serious passive aggressive tension between these two and the origin for basically the entire story is revealed with just a few lines. Great acting and storytelling without awkward exposition. The best stories are character driven and this scene is that to a T. I definitely would've kept this in the final cut.
This is such a much better scene. it's filmed, written, acted, shot and executed so much better. The comedic timing is also spot on, Love that Jack steals Becket's drink not once but twice and Becket just stays quiet like "Did he really just take my drink again...?" Lol
The entire scene wasn't removed, however a lot of what was said between Jack and Cutler Beckett was edited out, which was stupid because it gave us the history of Jack and Cutler Beckett, how he was involved in the East India Trading Company and more insight into Jack himself. So yeah, this would count as the completely unedited deleted scene.
And so, in a movie series that has undead skeleton pirates, ancient vengeful sea goddesses, and mutated fish psychopomps, the ultimate villain is a greedy human capitalist.
"People aren't cargo, mate." Jack might be a pirate and criminal in the eyes of the law, but that single line shows that he has more moral integrity than His High and Mighty Lord Cutler Beckett.
There’s no doubt in my mind that Beckett is Jack’s archenemy. Jones only antagonized Jack because he refused to fulfill his promise to serve on the Dutchman. In fact, Beckett was the reason why Jack had to make a deal with Jones in the first place. Beckett also is ambitious for power while Jones is basically terrorizing sailors just for kicks.
I mean Beckett is Jacks foil (opposite). He repersents everything Jack is not. Beckett thrives in order. Jack thrives in chaos. Beckett hates when things are out of his control. Jack was almost never in control the entire series. Beckett has no desire for adventure or liberty (his obsession with maps and filling them in) while Jack loves that. Beckett, more than anything, wants respect. Titles. Jack hates all that. He wants freedom; to be away from all the politics and governemnts and monarchs and civilization. He wants to be out on the open sea. Beckett hates piracy and everything it stands for. Jack, despite a lot of it being horrible and vile, loves and embcraces piracy because as much as we see all the ugly, disgusting looking pirates in the films which all repersent the stealing and killing and pilligaing parts of piracy, the aspects of free will and adventure and freedom is what Jack repersents. "What a ship is... what the Black Pearl really is... is freedom."
The part where he diverts his full attention to a neglected peanut is the single most impactful moment of the scene, listen to the dialogue while Jack is ignoring completely
It's no wonder they cut this scene out. It's got everything most big budget movies are terrified of these days; character development (not just the main character), chemistry between characters, smart dialogue, subtle exposition and even a small bit of comedy that isn't in-your-face
I wish they'd kept this version in. The revelation that Jack became a pirate for doing a good deed throws him, and all the pirates in general into a totally new light, and also justifies why they're the "good guys" in the fight. Plus, Beckett's speech about cargo not only solidifies a solid message for the series ("Imperialism bad") but also ties in nicely with the setting and time period beyond set dressing and aesthetic- not to mention its a good villain speech.
"people aren't cargo mate." That was a deleted line, but it speaks volumes about Jack's Character. It's incredible how just four words can tell so much about someone.
Funny that he said "Someone must make sure the world turns properly," yet he spun it the wrong way. The world turns counterclockwise to the sun, not clockwise.
“A ship isn’t just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails. That’s what a ship needs. But what a ship is, what the Black Pearl is is freedom.” I feel like that has even more impact knowing how true that was. The freedom of slaves, not just his own freedom, the freedom of people from chains.
Just realised the very first movie and first scene with jack "One good deed is not enough to redeem a man of a lifetime of wickedness" - "Though it seems enough to condemn him"
"On a silver platter." "With a frilly linen napkin and a spicy banana on the side." Hah, and you thought he wasn't listening to your treatise on the glory of cargo, Beckett.
This scene really should've been kept in, Jack only ever gets really serious when its really important to him, so it's cool to see him just snap at this due at the start
I love how you can tell how disgusted and disturbed by Beckett he is when he says that. Also helps show that he’d never actually help Beckett, just trick him.
Wow. At World's End was already fantastic as it is. But the more I watch the deleted scenes, the more I wish they could've been left in the movie! I know, it was already a very long film. But man, these deleted scenes were incredibly written and portrayed!
For the love of Neptune, WHY did they not leave this scene in the final cut??? It would've added much-needed depth to a scene that was ultimately just a lump of nothing. -_-
Actually, the climax would be enhanced. Jack did the right thing once, and he lost everything because of it. He acts more selfishly afterwards as a result. Him choosing to save Will instead of gaining immortality for himself is a full return to his heroic nature.
1:58 Absolutely fantastic moment that really shows how good of a person Jack is… that one word, that changed the way everyone views his character. “Peanut.”
I think that this scene should have stayed because it still shows what Jack really is about, what he represents. Freedom. If there’s anything a sparrow hates it’s to be chained down unable to fly.
I understand why this scene was removed; to keep us guessing about wether or not Jack is actually a good person. But it makes other parts of the movies very confusing. The "what mark did he leave on you" question that then remains unanswered and also the people in the swamp, mourning Jack's death with candles at the end of the second movie; they are the slaves he freed, but the viewers don't know this so it's just confusing.
Love how peanuts just seem to follow jack around the entirety of this movie, its really great, theres no reason for a peanut to be on becketts table but its just there, theres no significance too it, its just peanuts showing up in random spots for jack to eat and say the word "Peanut" and I think thats what makes it perfect
And why, pray, did this scene not make the final cut? It runs a bit long, sure, but it clears up a lot of long standing questions I've had regarding their shared history. It was always clear they had one.
I watched all of the bonus features of my Pirates of the Caribbean DVDs, but when it came to the third film, I don't recall EVER seeing this deleted scene included. What a bummer! This scene is great! Thanks for putting this up. Otherwise, I would not have come across this.
I remember this scene being shown in between a commercial break when At World's End was playing on TV. I remember watching this with my uncle and cousins and my uncle specifically saying "Thats probably the best deleted scene ever."
But this isn't even a deleted scene, it's altered. And I personally think THIS VERSION is superior, because as so many others have said before me, it says so much more about Jack's character.
It was criminal to delete this scene. This is one of the best deleted scenes ever. It answers so much of the questions we have about how jack ended up this way. Being lawful and being good are two totally different things. Jack is a good man. You can see hes still bitter about being branded scarred and branded for doing what he felt was right. He has no choice but to be a pirate now that hes been branded and he's simply a man who has decided to own his status. And it also explains his attachment to the black pearl since its the one he liberated the slaves in.
This is the one scene that makes the entire series: Jack freed slaves, making him a criminal.
1600s of founding the new world has slaves it's how you treat them is the most important.
And yet, this one scene that tells you practically everything about Jack Sparrow's motivations was cut from the movie.
shaodyn this was AWE, Jack was ready to, if he couldn’t complete the task Jones gave him, then his only other option was to offer up 100 innocent souls...
So having a scene of “Im a pirate, cause I’m against the slave trade” and then... “Yeah, lets go get 100 innocent people and practically sell their souls to servitude”
@@alexisoppenheim9609
Having people as slaves is bad enough
@@VicTheRod So, we agreed on principle... XD
The way the line “People aren’t cargo, mate” was said, really good acting. Captain Jack Sparrow looks up a little bit with a look of both anger annoyance, and his tone is a bit bitter. He literally stops what he’s doing just to rethink what he did in the past, and he doesn’t regret it. He is a pirate and he’s proud of it. He has got to be one of the best pirates I’ve ever seen.
So it would seem
When you put like that, it seems like he’s wearing the “P” brand as a badge of honor.
@@benjackson5411 He kinda is. Pirates were degenerates in history but there is a freedom fighter aspect of it. They are rebels against the rich, capitalism, imperialism. They were harming these, that's why they were ended, for standing against the system. Not for morality or anything, because what they stood against were also immoral.
So you have seen him?
Where did he say this line? At which point in this video?
“People aren’t cargo, mate.” I love that line so much as it shows of what a great person Jack Sparrow truly is by freeing slaves
Still pirate though
@@barnwell5471 the means doesn't dot dot dot.
The movies always showed that Jack Sparrow is a great person, i am not surprised, he just tricks the villains into thinking he'll team up with them to save his friends and then defeat the enemies
@@barnwell5471 He's not a real pirate tough idiot
@@tizyman7120 imagine getting mad and calling someone an idiot over pirates of the Caribbean lmfao
I really wish this scene had been kept. Gained a whole new LEVEL of respect for jack with those 4 words.
"People arent cargo mate..."
in the book series its hinted that Arabella Smith might be the mother of William Turner Jr.
also the hidden island he released the captured slaves on was the same island Tia Dalma lived on that we see in the 2nd movie
Yes it is in books XD
You aren't wrong.
@@Shadowpack95 and thats why they seem to mourn after his death by the kraken..?
Another reason why this scene should have been kept is because in the end of Dead Mans Chest when the crew go see Tia Dalma you see a lot of people holding candles in the swamp and mourning Jacks death. They were the slaves that he freed. It used to confuse me for years until I found out about this deleted scene.
Oh my god I've been wondering about this for years!!
Good Lord that makes so much sense now !!
"What the Black Pearl really is, is freedom."
Jack's only and true desire in life.
Grindelwald really screwed the life part in his movie in the Wizardry world. If he became an sailor in the Wizardry world he'll be Sinbad freeing wizards from branded as villains from their mage masters.
Alexis Oppenheim: I'd pay to see that.
#wickedwench
With this line and "People Aren't Cargo Mate", we really could have had a full picture of Jack's character; his unquenchable desire for freedom. There are probably few things that scream freedom quite as loudly as your own ship, and the open sea
One good deed is not enough to redeem a man of a lifetime of wickedness
Though it seems enough to condemn him
People aren’t cargo mate
Michael Zahabi: Couldn't agree more.
Who knew Commodore Norrington's remark about Captain Jack's "one good deed" would not be explained until 2 movies later, and only in a deleted scene at that. At first we just thought the "good deed" was just referring to saving Elizabeth's life.
@@Shadow91507 well, good is just a matter of perspective
@@Shadow91507 yeah. just noticed that reference
Damn, and one good deed really did condemn Jack. I never put those 2 together until now
"Your good deed cost me, Jack."
"And you have spared me of any possibility of ending up as anything other than what I am. And for that, I truly thank you."
Beckett lost money and status. People like Beckett think it is a huge loss, but it's not. They are so caught up in their own world they don't realize that these can be regained if opportunity strikes again. He continues to feel humiliated about it even after 10 years. Proof that Beckett is just like a child throwing a tantrum.
Jack lost the ability to choose his own fate. Jack can not become anything else. He is and will always be a pirate, whether he wants to be or not. But he accepts it, turns what should hurt him into his greatest asset. If he can only be a pirate, he will be the best one ever.
It sucks that the 5th movie kind of retcons the idea of Jack not always being a pirate and the brand upon him for freeing slaves is something he can only be in life. Jack wanted freedom for himself and others, piracy itself is a sense of freedom because those who commit feel they're obligated to abide by the law
So it would seem...
Similar to his character in Blow
What's neat about that line is how PISSED Beckett sounds when he says it. Most of the time, Beckett's lines are delivered with a confident smugness, indicating how much he enjoys lording (pun intended) his authority over others. But here, he's mad. Just goes to show you how much Jack's good deed was an insult to him.
@@dogswifty7800 the 5th movoe does not exist. I don’t consider it canon
This movie was way too long as it was, but I still wish they'd kept this scene. I know part of Jack's appeal is that he's kind of morally ambiguous, but his quiet and subdued "People aren't cargo, mate," could have been the perfect and simplest way to show the viewers exactly the kind of person he truly is. He puts on a goofy, carefree facade, but in the end he's got a good heart that cares about other people. I wish they'd taken the extra moment to show that.
Supreme Overlorde that Line ("people aren't cargo mate") is in the movie dude
Supreme Overlorde not only that, but it adds to the backstory of jack sparrow. We never did hear the reason why Beckett and jack hate each other, what the betrayal was, and how jack came to make a deal with jones to save the pearl.
They could've replaced a lot of pointless fighting scenes with scenes between characters
The reason they cut this is because it shows Jack can be selfless to help others. They wanted people to question if Jack would choose immortality or to save Will and Will's father.
This scene was crucial to understanding Jack and they took it out. Other scenes could've been taken out and even within this scene, there's just seconds worth of it that are actually needed. Editing saved big movies, but it can equally fuck things up.
"People aren't cargo, mate."
Those four words are ultimately what set the first 3 films in motion to begin with. Freeing slaves = branded as a pirate, ship sunken beneath the waves, Beckett's grudge. Sunken ship = deal with Jones and future piracy. Piracy = Barbossa, mutiny, and the curse. Mutiny and the curse = Will and Elizabeth's involvement, and Will Senior's enslavement to Jones. Beckett's grudge against Jack = seeking out what Jack's been involved with over the years, including Davy Jones' existence and cursed heart. All culminating in the events of this film because of Jack's good deed.
Basically, Jack's good deed resulted in one hell of a butterfly effect.
Put a whole new meaning on him telling Elizabeth that he likes to wave at chances to do the right thing as they pass by. He did it once. It didnt end well
He also got marooned on an island which drove him a little mad as to why his personality is so bonkers. Some people complain about the dream sequence in at world's end but I didn't mind too much because his crazy mind was a result of that marooning
This scene tells us so much more than the final cut did, and should have been kept. "People aren't cargo, mate" is one of the most important lines ever to be spoken by him because it not only shows Jack's true character that we rarely get to see, but it explains so much about his past and their relationship together and does it in such a small space. Rather than being vague about it like in the final cut, that line says exactly what it means and makes it all the more powerful in contrast to the innuendous and fakely formal conversation they have for the rest of the scene.
Its truly a heart felt scene and fills in another one of those gaps in jacks life
i think they could keep some stuff from this scene and combine it with some of the dialogue from the final cut
They did... jacks line from this was in the final cut lol
im saying the beginning of this scene they should add to the final cut
The scene is great, greater, I think, and any scene that ever made it into any of the movies. Unfortunately, it doesn't make any sense... It's a complete 180 on everything we know about Jack's character. In the second movie, Jack starts out literally rounding up a crew in order to trade them to Davy Jones for his soul, and even betrays Will, his own trusted friend who has risked his life to save Jack before, and he does this without a second thought or shred of remorse. We are expected to believe that this is the character of a man who freed slaves on principle???
Jack and Beckett have a deep history. Jack was suppose to deliver a cargo (of 100 slaves) to becket from Africa but he chose to free them instead and in return, Beckett burned Jack's ship, The Pearl, and branded him as a pirate. Jack asked Davy Jone to bring back his ship. Jones agreed for 100 souls (referring to the 100 ones he sent free). That's why Jack owes Jones 100 soul (said in the second movie) and why in their scene they showed his brand at 0:23
His ship was originally named The Wicked Wench. After he made his deal with Davy Jones it was raised from the depths and renamed The Black Pearl. I read the novel Pirates of the Caribbean: Price of Freedom. It is a good read and I highly recommend it. It answers many questions.
CrazyWerewolf444 I've hear of the book and read the reviews. It sounds amazing.
Janet Bui this just blew my mind!!!! And answered sooo many questions!!! THANK YOU!!!!!!!
Where does barbossa come in. He always insisted on the pearl being his.
and then Barbossa lead a mutiny against Jack?
_a scene that expands a character's backstory and his relationship with the antagonist_
Studio: We don't do that here.
_Elizabeth pulls a gun out of a questionable place_
Studio: *Real shit!*
Panthera I don’t even want to know how it looked like when she put it in. She must have missed will A LOT
Oh my
that's why the third movie felt so weird like it had a bunch of holes in it, they cut out many scenes. actually, all three movies did, the first one also had many great scenes cut out that showed more of the characters relationships
precisely
The second movie did the same where is a scene where master Gibs tells will about davy jones before they meet Calypso and he tells will that jack is not afraid of dying and that davy jones prefers punishment over death ( which explain why jack didnt die by the end of the second movie) deep charcater motives cut out again... or the extended dice game between will and davy jones or
like the jack, cutler becket scene in the third movie. With jack saving slaves or for him the black pearl being freedom.
and not only jack also in the third movie cut out important scenes for no reasons. Even elizebaths father had a deleted scene where he wants to stab davy jones heart and is stopped by norrington. Instead when Elizabeth saw her father in davy joney locker he tells her about the heart scene we didnt see. Cut out again.... It makes the death less impactfull. I really dont know why they cut out such important things in these 2 movies.
Their feud is very interesting if you read the website bios of these characters. Beckett was obsessed with becoming an elite, he wanted to get the title of “lord”. He worked in logistics for the West African branch of the EIC for over 10 years, and a lord living in the Bahamas promised him land and titles in exchange for slaves. Beckett contracted Jack to deliver the slaves, but Jack liberated them, preventing Beckett from becoming a lord. As payback, Beckett permanently branded Jack as a pirate and burned Jack’s ship, the Wicked Wench, turning the sails black and the hull charcoal. When Jones recreated it, it was rebranded the Black Pearl.
Very well put! I would like to add however: The Wicked Wench didn't get black sails and have the hull be shaded into charcoal until after Jones raised the ship, not before since the wiki also says that Jack jumped into a burning destroyed wreckage of the Wicked Wench and that's where he called upon Davy Jones.
It's in the book
That makes the bit where Elizabeth's father edognises him at the start of the second movie and Beckett corrects him with "yes, Lord now, actually" hit different
“If you’re offering me a seat on the board, I’m neither depraved enough nor drunk enough to accept.”
Beckett, reaching for shots: *Let’s change that then...*
And then he spends the rest of the scene stealing his liquor.
At the end, Jack is clamoring to get his whiskey glass refilled lol
@@samcochran8203 - Probably brandy or claret in this context.
"People arn't cargo, mate."
Love how he says it.
Great line ....while shows the true inner-self of Jack: A kinda hearted man, utterly wronged ...and now out to get back at the "man", while enjoying every ...single ...moment.
Savvy......
Except in PotC2, when he sells his friend Will Turner to Davy Jones... Does that not count because Will is white?
It is a stage of drama. It is the hero coming full circle.
You take a pure hero, than you cause him to be "broken via the world" and him to turn against his heroic past out of cynicism, then you cause him in the 2nd movie, the Empire Strike Back movie to have a Fall.
Only in the 3rd movie the fallen hero to have a redemption arc. The fallen hero is the hero once again, the old man is now the man who still has the ideals of his youthful self.
This is known as monomyth, also known as the hero's journey made famous via Joseph Campbell. You can identify many forms of narrative drama and themes in narrative works where you look at the work as a people playing archetypes, and one of the themes is that people can shift from one archetype, one extreme to another, in order to create the most drama. If your goal is to tell a hero's journey type of story you go from the hero becomes the villain becomes the hero again. Yet in other stories such as teaching kids be wary of strangers you may start with a villain who then does something good and just only to stab you in the back later on. Aka be mindful of traitors, for a traitor once has already shown they are fine with changing their morals and thus have no problem being a twice traitor.
Toa Tahu I think it's implied jack never meant for Davy Jones to keep will
Everyone's talking about that 4 word line, meanwhile I'm just so absorbed in how Jack keeps trying to steal every ounce of alcohol in the room.
RIGHT?!?!
You can really see the hurt in Jack’s eyes and sadness in his voice when he says “People aren’t cargo, mate.” He doesn’t regret freeing the slaves. I always hated Beckett, but I hated him even more when he referred to people as ‘cargo.’
This scene DESPERATELY needed to be in the movie. For as much as people like the fact that it adds the depth to Jack's character, this really provides a lot for Beckett. You see how his mind works, and that he demands control over the situation, because his life is all about maintaining order. He thinks people are simply subjects to be manipulated and contented with goods and services. He's more than willing to play the role of the puppetmaster. But the second he loses control of the situation, i.e. when Jack liberated those slaves, he lost control and it drove him to hunt Jack down.
"Your good deed cost me, Jack."
"And you have spared me any possibility of ending up as anything other than what I am. And for that, I truly thank you."
I think what was brilliant about what Jack said was that it was guised as that he prefers being a pirate, but it was really him just calmly explaining to Beckett how he destroyed his life. He was a captain under the employ of the East India Trading Company, made a good living, and was content with life. But he saw wrong and sought to correct it, and he was thrown in the lot as being nothing more than a common criminal. His mind basically snapped, which would explain his erratic nature. It really gives true insight into who Jack Sparrow is as a character.
Wow I perceived it differently. For Jack, to be forever branded a criminal if it means freeing 100 slaves, it's a decision worth making. Captain Jack Sparrow has never regretted it.
@@Shadow91507 then Pirates of the Caribbean dead men ruined that by simply having him be a pirate before that.
@@m.032 Huh. Sounds like Dead Men ruined both ideas, unless Dead Men's inconsistent with the overall universe?
Cuz Jack supposedly nvr became criminal until branded so by Beckett for freeing 100 slaves.
It's been a while since i watched the movies.
Mario Sotelo Jack’s dad was a pirate so he might’ve quit the pirate life, then returned after his ship burned
Well I wouldn't say snapped, I think that happens later for unrelated reasons this is simply the roots of his past and true morality.
I found this scene because of tumblr, why did they take this out?? it explains so much. why jack was branded a pirate, why his debt is 100 souls. damn such a great scene
Maple Dream I think they took it out because it portrayed Jack too much in a heroic light & Disney wanted to keep his status as an anti-hero.
Moreover, it would be confusing if viewers never read the backstory. "People not cargo" would be hard to incorporate into the story given its already massive plot
It also enhances the meaning of the ending where Jack saves Will. Allow me to elaborate:
The reason the initial scene was cut was because Gore Verbinski thought it made Jack look like too good of a person and it conflicts with his devious, self-centered nature. But the reason why this should've been kept is this: Jack is a devious, self-centered person BECAUSE he was a good person.
He worked for the East India Trading Company, captain of his own ship, making a good living, and content with his life's choices. He adhered to the principles of being an honest citizen as a merchant sailor.
But when Beckett asked him to transport 100 slaves, he knew that this was wrong. Acting upon his good conscience, he freed the slaves because it was the right thing to do. His morals trumped his duty for the EITC, and he was a good man for it.
But then Beckett brands him a pirate, marking him as nothing more than a common criminal. He destroys his reputation, his livelihood, and his ship. Everything he worked for in life, gone before his very eyes. All because he wanted to do the right thing.
Recognizing the hypocrisy of Beckett for labeling him as "evil" despite the very nature of slavery being evil, Jack became a pirate of his own free-will, now that his former life as an honest sailor is in tatters. Doing the right thing cost him everything, so from that point on, he only cares about one person: himself.
But when he sees Will dying, he's reminded of the good man he once was. He has a chance at immortality, and he sacrifices it to save a friend. He does the right thing even though he has nothing to gain from it. He's a pirate because he wants to deny his selfless nature, but he can't stop himself because Jack Sparrow is a good man.
jeffairlin rousseau Eh, I don’t think it would show Jack as a “good person” so much as give him some layers.
I mean, hell, even straight up *villains* will have that one thing that they can’t and won’t abide by, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that they are good people.
@@theotherghostgirl337 Yeah, everyone has a line that they won't cross. A point where even they will say, "This is going too far, even for me."
I do like the interpretation of him being good at heart, too, though.
I hope that the people at Disney studios actually put together extended versions of all three original pirates movies. This scene is so much better in its full form.
Woodsstories Ikr I want extended cuts of all the movies. Extended cuts are the best. I want to see everything shot.
They won’t do that. Disney cares about one thing and one thing only: money. Stacks upon stacks upon stacks of it.
@@davidmcaninch4714 People will pay to see them, and buy the releases for their collections.
There's a lot of talk about Jack's morality... but I can't believe nobody is bringing up the chemistry these two are projecting in this scene.
Beckett's leaning so close to Jack when they're negotiating and Jack's leaning right back in. Beckett's practically whispering in his ear. That rare moment of vulnerability for both of them at "people aren't cargo" / "your good deed cost me, Jack."
Look at how Beckett laughs at Jack's jokes. That expression on his face when Jack steals his second drink. "You haven't changed."
Then this scene carries right on into "What about Miss Swann?" "What is she to you?", and Beckett's smile at those words.
Then Jack correctly surmises that what Beckett wants most is Jack (dead), pushing home what an obsession Beckett has with Jack. Seems like Jack's good deed was a real *personal* betrayal to Beckett.
How do they know each other so well? What was the nature of their past relationship, exactly? What I'm saying is that Kiera Knightley has nothing like this kind of chemistry in her role with Jack. Tom Hollander's over here playing Beckett like he doesn't know if he wants to kiss Jack or carve out his eyes.
"People aren't cargo mate"
Respect to Jack increases.
PEANUT.
Why was this deleted. I could listen to Cutler Beckett on a tangent all day about spices and bananas.
Tracy Ngo Bruh! I think hes an amazing villain!
Tracy Ngo
He has a very lovely voice.
@@Michegrey I wouldn't even call him a villain, the pirates are the bad ones, aren't they? For Beckett it's just... it's just... Good business
It depends on whose perspective....most pirates were regular sailors that couldn't afford the taxes on most ports and had to turn to crime to make a living
@Alexander Brunnrgaard and how about in term of freedom fight?? What u mean by abiding the law?? And how u see east india company as they plaunder their colonial and kidnap their people for slavering..
i dont understand why this scene was deleted it was so much better then the final cut and even shows the relationship between jack and becket
It would've made his character too cemented in the moral sense, which wouldn't work for the movie -- he needed to be kept in the line of being a chaotic neutral hero.
There could be many reasons. Maybe they didn't like the scene? Maybe they felt the movie needed to be shorter?
Sometimes, good character development is better than narrative. In this sense, in my opinion, this scene should've been kept.
@@GamesCooky " Maybe they felt the movie needed to be shorter?" At World's End definitely needed to be a lot shorter, and I can think of like 10 scenes that could have been cut to achieve that if it meant keeping this one.
@@luvahadowsdolls You can still be "chaotic neutral" and have certain ethical lines that you won't cross. Dipping into slavery is definitely a crime against humanity that would turn a chaotic neutral character into neutral evil.
This was a good scene because there was so much more in it than the dialogue. Everything Jack and Beckett do, physically, in this room reflects something about their characters. The little shot of Beckett putting the model ship that Jack messed with back upright. The shot of Jack doing a double take of the heroically-posed portrait of Beckett. The peanut... I also like that Beckett seemed perfectly willing to offer Jack an attractive position in the East India Company despite his personal hatred of the man. He is dedicated to 'good business' above all else. Great character
The scene was deleted because it removes any lingering doubt of Jack's self-serving nature. It was important for the narrative that Jack could cross anyone at any time and serve himself. While the reason why he became a pirate is very cool, it screws up the rest of the film because it becomes clear that he's a good, self-sacrificing soul. That he would give up what he craves most, immortality, for Will Turner, without too much hesitation. That's why it had to be cut, sadly.
You are right on why they cut it out and completely understand their reasons. But sometimes narrative is just as important as character details. They still could have kept that information in while trimming this scene out and keeping everything else intact. It gives Jack Sparrow a more in depth personality something I wished was addressed more as there were certain scenes in the trilogy that did this and did it well.
I don't know, we know from the first movie that he values freedom very much, "what the black pearl really is....is freedom"
Also when he didn't shoot will even though he was keeping him from escaping, he's not entirely selfish
I agree....But it atleast shows why he didn't stab jones's heart at the end and gave it to Will. Its shows why Sparrow is a good man rather than a good pirate.
He didn't shoot Will because he was saving that specific bullet for personal revenge. I feel like in 3 Jack had a change of heart (no pun intended) rather than him being good the entire time. He literally sold Will into slavery to save his own skin... His slave-freeing origin doesn't actually make any sense given his actions and character later, which is too bad, because this scene is absolutely awesome...
Actually, with this scene it enhances the ending where Jack saves Will. Jack frees those slaves on impulse, knowing that there's something wrong and he does what he believes is right, and what happens to him afterwards? He's branded a criminal and an outcast from society, and his life as an honest sailor for the EITC dies at that moment. After an experience like that, Jack decides that he doesn't want to be the hero anymore, because it's given him nothing but loss and pain. He resolves to act in self-interest because being selfless only hurt him, and he continues this throughout his life despite his inherently good nature. For him to be on the chosen path of selfishness really heightens Jack's character, because he has no reason to do the right thing again. But he comes around and saves Will's life, because in the end, Jack Sparrow is "a pirate, and a good man."
Jack constantly taking Beckett's drinks from him has me cracking up.
1:59
Jack: Peanut
Beckett: You’re a clever man Jack
LMAOO
it’s one thing to have a serious character deliver a line this well. but to have one of the funniest and most comedic characters to just break your heart with this line delivery
Many have pointed out the contrast between Jack's past noble actions (freeing the slaves) and his current self-serving nature. For me, this scene just tells a lot about how his current character developed. In the past, when Jack freed the slaves, he was probably much more idealistic, however being branded as a pirate and being forced to watch his ship burn by Becket lead him to become the more selfish/treacherous person he is now. I think he is hinting this himself with his answer to Becket ("And you have spared me any possibility of ending up as anything other than what I am. And for that I truly thank you"). When Becket punished him for not doing something that was undoubtedly wrong (delivering the slaves), he showed him how corrupt the world truly was, causing Jack to become much more pragmatic and eventually become the character he now is, which is probably why Jack is thanking him.
So both are same now, Jack isn't any better person.
@@lopamudra5398 except for fact that he still don't kill people unless needed and kills bad people
Spared angelica
Another thing that helped shape Jack's behaviour was the mutiny. Gibs says so in the first movie
@@lopamudra5398 true. However the difference is that Beckett MADE Jack that way.He wasn't always so jaded and manipulative. How would you feel if you saved a child from being hit by a drunk driver and then that same person burns your house down and made it look like you did it for the insurance. You'd become a tad self serving and traitorous too
1000% agree
1:46 "And as long as it is delivered on time and in sufficient supply, then they are content to be nothing more than figures on a ledger."
Tom Hollander's delivery of that line is superb. Perfect cadence with just the right balance of malice and sophistication. We can tell that Beckett truly believes what he is saying and he believes himself to be superior to everyone else because he has a "noble responsibility" to keep everything running.
and then Jack is at the other side of the room murmuring "Peanut."
Really should have made the cut, explains so much and so well. How jack freed slaves and was branded a pirate so he decided "fuck it, I'll be the best damn pirate ever!" Sold his soul to resurrect his and most loved ship. The origin of the black pearl would also explain its supernatural speed
I really wish they'd left this in the movie. I don't care how much longer it would've been, some of those deleted scenes should've been left alone. Especially when they help tell the story. I wonder how pissed off actors get when they work hard one a scene and then find out it didn't make the cut
Love the sincerity in his voice, especially for such a character: 0:15
"people aren't cargo mate."
Don't know why, but I love it.
:D
+Buddy Do you know the story he is refering to? I'ts awesome
*****
I guess that's a sub par generalization of a way of saying it.. but sure
Buddy and it's slightly historically accurate too. I think at some point, a good percentage of old pirates were old slaves; and I think you could bet that their liberators might just have the same profession because they have no where else to be after turning traitor against a gargantuan of an Organization like the East Indies Company.
I always laugh when Jack’s obsession with peanuts kicks in 😂 1:45
Another reason why they should have kept this scene
Everyone talking about how he freed slaves, i'm more impressed by the amount of drinking he does in these two minutes
2:16 *1st shot of whiskey*
3:10 *2nd shot*
3:58 *Jack requests a refill*
Guy's probably shitfaced by the time he escapes.
He actually takes 2 shots back to back at 2:16
That’s nothing for captain jack sparrow
They're just shots.... literally everyone does them at a bar that quickly sometimes...
There's some serious passive aggressive tension between these two and the origin for basically the entire story is revealed with just a few lines. Great acting and storytelling without awkward exposition. The best stories are character driven and this scene is that to a T. I definitely would've kept this in the final cut.
“It’s Jack, Lord Beckett.”
Beckett: “Hide my Rum.”
The way he said it People aren't cargo mate with such sadness like it hurt him to state something so obvious... love it
You can here his voice crack when he say's 'People aren't cargo, mate'
People aren’t cargo mate that one little line of dialogue reveals so much of Jack sparrow’s actual character
He was branded a criminal for giving people other saw as property freedom. This gave me a wheel new level of respect for Jack sparrow.
This scene absolutely should not have been deleted. This is absolutely critical context
This is such a much better scene. it's filmed, written, acted, shot and executed so much better. The comedic timing is also spot on, Love that Jack steals Becket's drink not once but twice and Becket just stays quiet like "Did he really just take my drink again...?" Lol
The entire scene wasn't removed, however a lot of what was said between Jack and Cutler Beckett was edited out, which was stupid because it gave us the history of Jack and Cutler Beckett, how he was involved in the East India Trading Company and more insight into Jack himself. So yeah, this would count as the completely unedited deleted scene.
“People aren’t Cargo mate!” They should have left this scene in. Adds so much depth to an already complex character.
And so, in a movie series that has undead skeleton pirates, ancient vengeful sea goddesses, and mutated fish psychopomps, the ultimate villain is a greedy human capitalist.
"People aren't cargo, mate."
Jack might be a pirate and criminal in the eyes of the law, but that single line shows that he has more moral integrity than His High and Mighty Lord Cutler Beckett.
There’s no doubt in my mind that Beckett is Jack’s archenemy. Jones only antagonized Jack because he refused to fulfill his promise to serve on the Dutchman. In fact, Beckett was the reason why Jack had to make a deal with Jones in the first place. Beckett also is ambitious for power while Jones is basically terrorizing sailors just for kicks.
beckett is his true enemy, that's why his death scene on 3 was satisfying!
@@badomens8465 especially since he racked up the highest death toll of any Disney villain (not including MCU villains like Thanos).
@@sparkshark789 oh i didn't know that , that's cool
I mean Beckett is Jacks foil (opposite). He repersents everything Jack is not. Beckett thrives in order. Jack thrives in chaos. Beckett hates when things are out of his control. Jack was almost never in control the entire series. Beckett has no desire for adventure or liberty (his obsession with maps and filling them in) while Jack loves that. Beckett, more than anything, wants respect. Titles. Jack hates all that. He wants freedom; to be away from all the politics and governemnts and monarchs and civilization. He wants to be out on the open sea. Beckett hates piracy and everything it stands for. Jack, despite a lot of it being horrible and vile, loves and embcraces piracy because as much as we see all the ugly, disgusting looking pirates in the films which all repersent the stealing and killing and pilligaing parts of piracy, the aspects of free will and adventure and freedom is what Jack repersents. "What a ship is... what the Black Pearl really is... is freedom."
3:05
Beckett is so done with Sparrow at this point LOL.
That's what happens when you offer a pirate captain free rum.
"People aren't cargo, mate"! What a powerful line, man!
The part where he diverts his full attention to a neglected peanut is the single most impactful moment of the scene, listen to the dialogue while Jack is ignoring completely
It's no wonder they cut this scene out. It's got everything most big budget movies are terrified of these days; character development (not just the main character), chemistry between characters, smart dialogue, subtle exposition and even a small bit of comedy that isn't in-your-face
I wish they'd kept this version in. The revelation that Jack became a pirate for doing a good deed throws him, and all the pirates in general into a totally new light, and also justifies why they're the "good guys" in the fight. Plus, Beckett's speech about cargo not only solidifies a solid message for the series ("Imperialism bad") but also ties in nicely with the setting and time period beyond set dressing and aesthetic- not to mention its a good villain speech.
"people aren't cargo mate." That was a deleted line, but it speaks volumes about Jack's Character. It's incredible how just four words can tell so much about someone.
"one good isn't enough to absolve a man"
"But it is enough to condemn him"
The irony.
Funny that he said "Someone must make sure the world turns properly," yet he spun it the wrong way. The world turns counterclockwise to the sun, not clockwise.
I love how companies such as Disney have such a strict "Bad guys can't be good people" policy that they were too afraid to say slavery is bad.
“A ship isn’t just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails. That’s what a ship needs. But what a ship is, what the Black Pearl is is freedom.” I feel like that has even more impact knowing how true that was. The freedom of slaves, not just his own freedom, the freedom of people from chains.
“People aren’t cargo mate” that one line adds so much depth to Jack, I really wish this scene was in the movie
0:24 - 0:26 a rare serious face of jack
**great scene of characterization for Jack Sparrow where he literally freed people from slavery**
Disney: Cut it.
Just realised the very first movie and first scene with jack "One good deed is not enough to redeem a man of a lifetime of wickedness" - "Though it seems enough to condemn him"
"If you're offering me a seat on the board, I am neither deranged enough or drunk enough to accept"
"On a silver platter."
"With a frilly linen napkin and a spicy banana on the side."
Hah, and you thought he wasn't listening to your treatise on the glory of cargo, Beckett.
0:51 the face jack makes when he looks at Beckett's portrait lol
Beckett could be initiated into Slytherin House with that voice alone!
I love how Captain Jack Sparrow keeps stealing Beckett’s drink😂
I love how Jack took Beckett's drink from him at 3:05 xD
This scene really should've been kept in, Jack only ever gets really serious when its really important to him, so it's cool to see him just snap at this due at the start
I laughed at when Jack kept taking Becketts shots and drinking them 🤣 His face is like "Damn it Jack, I want a drink too!"
One deleted scene catapulted Jack to a whole new level. BUT THE PROBLEM IS THAT IT WAS DELETED.
I love how you can tell how disgusted and disturbed by Beckett he is when he says that. Also helps show that he’d never actually help Beckett, just trick him.
This scene makes everything much clearer and there's also so many funny moments in it! It's a shame it was cut
Wow. At World's End was already fantastic as it is. But the more I watch the deleted scenes, the more I wish they could've been left in the movie! I know, it was already a very long film. But man, these deleted scenes were incredibly written and portrayed!
This scene is the foundation of Jack's entire character and his pursuit of freedom, and they left it out. Such a shame.
For the love of Neptune, WHY did they not leave this scene in the final cut??? It would've added much-needed depth to a scene that was ultimately just a lump of nothing. -_-
0toHero Because it gave Jack more of a heroic quality. Disney probably wanted to keep his status as an anti-hero
Because it would've muddled the climax of the film.
Actually, the climax would be enhanced. Jack did the right thing once, and he lost everything because of it. He acts more selfishly afterwards as a result. Him choosing to save Will instead of gaining immortality for himself is a full return to his heroic nature.
1:58 Absolutely fantastic moment that really shows how good of a person Jack is… that one word, that changed the way everyone views his character.
“Peanut.”
The end when he's gesturing to his glass asking for more...... one of the funniest bits
The way Beckett's face lit up at the mention of 'a silver platter'. That's despicable.
I think that this scene should have stayed because it still shows what Jack really is about, what he represents. Freedom. If there’s anything a sparrow hates it’s to be chained down unable to fly.
The ultimate expression of "even evil has standards". A pirate who draws the line at slave-trafficking.
I understand why this scene was removed; to keep us guessing about wether or not Jack is actually a good person.
But it makes other parts of the movies very confusing. The "what mark did he leave on you" question that then remains unanswered and also the people in the swamp, mourning Jack's death with candles at the end of the second movie; they are the slaves he freed, but the viewers don't know this so it's just confusing.
Really wish they'd kept this in! It deepens the story so much!
Jack repeatedly taking his drink is legendary
Love how peanuts just seem to follow jack around the entirety of this movie, its really great, theres no reason for a peanut to be on becketts table but its just there, theres no significance too it, its just peanuts showing up in random spots for jack to eat and say the word "Peanut" and I think thats what makes it perfect
Captain Sparrow was always a good man from the beginning, this scene would’ve just solidified it.
The last five seconds of this video cracked me up
"Why is the rum always gone?"
1:01 jack: its how i get by " *poses *
omg i cant breathe
And why, pray, did this scene not make the final cut? It runs a bit long, sure, but it clears up a lot of long standing questions I've had regarding their shared history. It was always clear they had one.
0g0dn0 apparently the scenes of a child being hung were fine, but slavery references were no bueno
the other ghost girl: Where's the logic in that?
4 words. All it took was 4 words to change Jack Sparrow's character for life.
I watched all of the bonus features of my Pirates of the Caribbean DVDs, but when it came to the third film, I don't recall EVER seeing this deleted scene included. What a bummer! This scene is great! Thanks for putting this up. Otherwise, I would not have come across this.
This entire scene is fantastic and adds so much background to Jack
Jack just keeps taking all his drinks. That a boy.
I remember this scene being shown in between a commercial break when At World's End was playing on TV. I remember watching this with my uncle and cousins and my uncle specifically saying "Thats probably the best deleted scene ever."
But this isn't even a deleted scene, it's altered. And I personally think THIS VERSION is superior, because as so many others have said before me, it says so much more about Jack's character.
2:27 lol he takes both shots
3:08 and takes his drink again 🤣
It was criminal to delete this scene. This is one of the best deleted scenes ever. It answers so much of the questions we have about how jack ended up this way. Being lawful and being good are two totally different things. Jack is a good man. You can see hes still bitter about being branded scarred and branded for doing what he felt was right. He has no choice but to be a pirate now that hes been branded and he's simply a man who has decided to own his status. And it also explains his attachment to the black pearl since its the one he liberated the slaves in.
No good deed goes unpunished. Jack did one good thing and set a chain of events that affected him through 3 whole movies. Wish they kept this scene