Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Shadow

13 posts in this topic

It always irritates me that little Lord Buckethead (Beckett) comes in and crashes Will and Elizabeth's wedding so he can get to Jack.

And then Elizabeth escapes and makes Beckett sign and seal the Letters of Marque(even though the "charges" against her and Will are trumped up). When she has the "opportune" moment to get rid of him, she chooses to just run out of their, leaving Beckett alive.

I say that I would shoot him. Firstly, Beckett ruined Will and Elizabeth's wedding only because he wants Jack. Second, he never intended on releasing them, but hanging them, compass or no compass.

I know Elizabeth didn't know he wants the seas until after she speaks to Jack, but she knew that Beckett was trying to kill her and Will.

What would you do if you were Elizabeth in that instance?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe she doesn't shoot him, because she hasn't lost all her conscience yet? (She will do that later by chaining Jack to the mast.)

I guess, I would not have killed him. Even if he spoiled my wedding with Will. Hmmm - let me think about that part again. :teehee: But seriously, I could imagine, it's not that easy to shoot someone in the face while looking him straight into the eye. And killing Beckett would not bring back Will either. Although I must admit, I am sometimes very close to throttle HER, when I am watching the movies. :rolleyes: Especially when she has those hysterical fits.

But in that Beckett scene I have quite a different question. Why on earth is she telling Beckett, that the gold of Isla de Muerta is cursed? (Of course, she says that, because the audience has to hear that story again. Plus we have to learn that the compass leads not only to Isla de Muerta. But what reason does she have IN the movie?)

If I were Elizabeth, I might have a problem with shooting him in the face, but I would DEFINITELY have no problem with sending him to Isla de Muerta and letting him find out about the curse all by himself. :teehee:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it would've been for the best if she shot Beckett. She'd be saving herself and Will. She wouldn't have to worry about Beckett controlling the seas. Piracy would be safe as well.

And she never sees Beckett again until At World's End and by then he's killed people for no reason, just because they think pirate or say the word pirate even. I think it best to get rid of him instead of waiting for him to do damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol: Buckethead. Good name for him.

While shooting Beckett on sight is a tempting proposition, there are a few flaws in the plan. Beckett arrived in Port Royal as an emissary of the King and killing him would've made those trumped up charges valid and then nothing could've saved her from the gallows. She was still hoping to settle down with Will in Port Royal and murdering :drool_bucket:-head would've completely distroyed that possibility. Remember, she hadn't turned pirate yet.

Also, she still believed that it was a simple matter of getting Beckett's signature on the letters of mark, retrieving the compass, and she and Will would be free to pursue the life they had planned before their wedding was so rudely interrupted. Why murder someone for trying to get his hands on the compass? As she learned from Jack later, Beckett's plans were much more terrible than she had suspected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:lol: Buckethead. Good name for him.

Beckett arrived in Port Royal as an emissary of the King and killing him would've made those trumped up charges valid and then nothing could've saved her from the gallows.

Also, she still believed that it was a simple matter of getting Beckett's signature on the letters of mark, retrieving the compass, and she and Will would be free to pursue the life they had planned before their wedding was so rudely interrupted.

Actually, Beckett is not in Port Royal for the King and Crown. He's there for his East India Trading Company. I can't believe that Beckett was truly an emissary for the King since he has no respect for the law himself(he would kill the King's Governor in Pirates 3 and look what he did to those people at the beginning of Pirates 3. They haven't committed crimes, I'm certain.) If Will and Elizabeth were to be prosecuted, it wouldn't have taken a year for someone to come after them.

How can she be charged for killing him if no one was there but her and Beckett? All she'd need to do is pull the trigger, and she'd be long gone before anyone could catch her. No evidence, no proof. And besides, she could always take a pardon after killing Beckett, in the worst scenario.

I can't imagine someone like Elizabeth would trust a man like Beckett. He trumped up some charges so Will would have a reason to return with the compass. But when Elizabeth escaped, Swann basically told her that Beckett's "deal" with Will is all a trick and he will kill them either way. I can't imagine her thinking that Beckett would let her go that easily and he didn't.

And then, when she gives the Letters to Jack,(and not Will) I ask, why bother? I think letting Beckett go is a big mistake on her part.

And isn't Elizabeth willing to do anything for Will? She sent Jack to the Kraken for him. Even if she hadn't embraced her pirate side yet, I still think she'd kill to save Will.

By the way, I like my name for Beckett too! :teehee:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How can she be charged for killing him if no one was there but her and Beckett? All she'd need to do is pull the trigger, and she'd be long gone before anyone could catch her. No evidence, no proof. And besides, she could always take a pardon after killing Beckett, in the worst scenario.

You have a criminal mind, Shadow. :tsktsk::teehee:

It's been a while since I've watched the films but Beckett wouldn't have been able to wield full control of the Royal Navy unless the King had agreed to it. The head of the East India Trading Company wouldn't have had the Royal Navy at this beck-and-call it the king hadn't given his say so. Becket says to Elizabeth, "I see you already know that loyalty is no longer the currency of the realm as your father believes." And when she asks him what is he says, "I'm afraid currency is the currency of the realm." The crown was loosing a lot of merchant ships and profit to pirates and I think Beckett told the King that he could put an end to the pirates if the King would agree to turn a blind eye for awhile. This would also explain why Gov. Swann had to try to see the King in person and not just send a formal written complaint as he might have done otherwise.

As for why Elizabeth didn't shoot Beckett, I can only say that she had a conscience which is really the only that separates the good guys from the bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You have a criminal mind, Shadow. :tsktsk::teehee:

As for why Elizabeth didn't shoot Beckett, I can only say that she had a conscience which is really the only that separates the good guys from the bad.

Yeah, I know. :teehee:

I still think that even though Elizabeth has a conscience, it's a big mistake leaving the man alive at all. When she does leave him, he has his little toady Mercer follow her around. I think it's very unwise since it leaves him to raise an alarm, as it were, and look what happens to Swann. Also, even though I despise the character, he later corrupts Norrington into his service.

Still, I think if Elizabeth loves Will, she would've gotten rid of the man that threatened him. She was so gung-ho about ending his life in At World's End because he killed Swann, what's so different about him sending Will out on a mission(in which Will could've been killed?)

I say, if she wasn't going to kill him, beat him up or something. He ruined her wedding and sent poor Will out on a wild goose chase(more like wild sparrow chase :teehee: ) and planned to kill him anyway. I don't think she should've let him off easy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I probably would´ve done worse things to Beckett than just shoot him. The wrath of a woman can be sooo terrible :naughty: .On the other hand, there would´ve been another "Beckett" if the first one were gone. I bet the EITC had lots of men for the job.

I can forgive Elisabeth for not shooting or hurting him, but I can never forgive her for not telling Will "I love you.". Never ever!

~ Inga ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can forgive Elisabeth for not shooting or hurting him, but I can never forgive her for not telling Will "I love you.". Never ever!

Goood point! :thumbsup: I absolutely agree. She treats him quite poorly for all he's done for her. I would have loved to see him freak out at her just once. But he is much to nice for this world - and especially for her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am with Lovely Pride on this in that I doubt Elizabeth would have shot Beckett in this scene. She might have wanted to do so, but I agree, she still has a conscience at this point and doesn't fully realize how evil Beckett and EITC are yet. And since her main objective was to gain her freedom, it would not have made sense to murder a Lord. While she might have snuck in, she would have had a harder time sneaking out if she fired the gun. Nearby guards(And Beckett surely would have them close since pirates could be lurking around) would have barged in. Even if she managed to escape, she would be a fugitive on the run.

But in that Beckett scene I have quite a different question. Why on earth is she telling Beckett, that the gold of Isla de Muerta is cursed? (Of course, she says that, because the audience has to hear that story again. Plus we have to learn that the compass leads not only to Isla de Muerta. But what reason does she have IN the movie?)

If I were Elizabeth, I might have a problem with shooting him in the face, but I would DEFINITELY have no problem with sending him to Isla de Muerta and letting him find out about the curse all by himself. :teehee:

Actually, I think Elizabeth telling Beckett about the cursed gold was more for her benefit than his(although Beckett is conceited enough to think otherwise. :teehee: ) If Beckett and his crew were to find the gold, it wouldn't take them too long to find out the only way to break the curse is Will's blood. So it would be like Barbossa and COTBP all over again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well said Marilyn. And Beckett was enough trouble as a mortal. If he and his officers became immortal he might've actually succeed in his bid to rule the seas.

Elizabeth and Will's relationship did seem a bit one-sided at times. She loved him deeply and did as much for him as he did for her but it bothers me that she stayed silent to him about her part in Jack's death for as long as she did. When he asks her, "how long are going to not speak to each other?" (AWE) my heart absolutely breaks for him. To not tell him immediately is one thing but sit on that secret for what must've been months (how long would it take a clipper ship to sail from the Carribean to Singapore to Antarctica?), allowing him imagine the worst, is just callous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually, I think Elizabeth telling Beckett about the cursed gold was more for her benefit than his(although Beckett is conceited enough to think otherwise. :teehee: ) If Beckett and his crew were to find the gold, it wouldn't take them too long to find out the only way to break the curse is Will's blood. So it would be like Barbossa and COTBP all over again.

Well. although this leads to a CotBP discussion: No. I don't think, they would need Will's blood. That blood was paid. They would need their own blood - and Jack the monkey. :teehee: Now THAT would have been a movie. I'd love to see a severely annoyed Beckett chasing after a screeching skeleton monkey. :lol:

Now back to DMC, sorry for off topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I probably would´ve done worse things to Beckett than just shoot him. The wrath of a woman can be sooo terrible :naughty:

~ Inga ~

Exactly! I wouldn't have let Beckett get off that easy! The guy ruined Elizabeth's wedding not for the sake of the law or Crown, but for his lust for dominance. If I were Elizabeth, I'd beat him good for that. You know what they say about a woman scorned. :naughty:

It's always the fact that she has a gun. I say what's the point of the gun(other than to make Beckett sign the Letters) if she's not going to use it? She doesn't need to know he plans to take over the seas. She knew he wanted the compass and planned to trap Will on the gallows as soon as he got said compass. I think that's all she needed to know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×