An IMDb review says the following:

Filming the first movie, they had no idea how much of a hit it would be. This time around they did.

And I think that kind of sums it up. Part of the mad love for the first one is because the fact that it was a good movie was so entirely unexpected.

Another thing I liked was that any time the cage or wheel or whatever bizarre thing passed by, all the characters stopped to look at it with WTF faces.

Saw “Pirates of the Caribbean” -- There were some cute moments, but overall it was distractingly bloated -- the whole movie (2 ½ hours) as well as individual scenes. *** For example, the 3-way sword fight was funny, including Elizabeth’s frustrated reactions. But it went on and on and on and on. We have the long bit on the beach and then the trek to the building, then the long fight on the wheel and then back to the beach and … whatever.

It also seemed too scary and gross in places. There were a lot of kids at the showing I attended and it was too intent for a fair number of them.

I’m also disappointed by the whole “to be continued” thing. I had read only a few stories about the movie so I was not aware of it in advance. I was left with the feeling that there was only enough plot for one sequel and the studio pumped in a lot of bilge to stretch it out to two. ***

the [spoiler] was funny, including [spoiler]

Heh. I loved "Oh, the heat! The heat!"

I was aware of the cliffhanger ending because a film critic on my flist posted that it was the best cliffhanger since Empire Strikes Back.

Part of the mad love for the first one is because the fact that it was a good movie was so entirely unexpected.

Yeah, the first one was so much better than it had any right to be that even its flaws are kind of lovable. Johanna was telling me that she looked at the reviews right before going to see it, and since a lot of them were negative it lowered her expectations enough that she had the same kind of "Hey, this is much better than I thought it would be! Yay!" experience. Plus, this one is effectively half a movie, which makes it harder to judge. I didn't know it ended with a cliffhanger -- or several, really -- either; that does make the simultaneous filming more sensible.

Johanna was telling me that she looked at the reviews right before going to see it, and since a lot of them were negative it lowered her expectations enough that she had the same kind of "Hey, this is much better than I thought it would be! Yay!" experience.

See, I finally went to see it because I'd been hearing awesome things about it, so I was surprised to discover that the word-of-mouth was true.

I want to watch the first one again now. And you know what, I totally can. My cousin here has the DVD. I was actually the one who told her to go see it, and now she's a giant fangirl.

Space Monkeys (of course): When Davy Jones plays the organ with his tentacles -- was anyone else reminded of Captain Nemo from 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea?

Yeah, definitely. I think that was deliberate, given the submarine-ish ship and the kraken.

There's an interview with the writers at Box Office Mojo (registration required). One non-spoilery highlight about the 3rd movie:

Box Office Mojo: Is the title Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End?

Terry Rossio: That's what we're campaigning for—but it's not set.

Ted Elliott: I like it because then you could say 'POTC: AWE.'

That movie made me the happiest I've been (in-theater) since the last one came out.

However, my friendslist is all over how racist it is, and now I am (A) sad and (B) worried that I'm not allowed to like it any more.

[link]

Oh, and the OT3? So canon now. So very canon.

"Allowed" is a strong term. Like it if you will.

I posted in oyceter's LJ. Funnily, the first movie bothered me because I grew near a (the?) Port Royal which was a hotbed of piracy--the pirate capital of the world, and one of the richest cities in the Americas. So it was jarring to see their Port Royal, peaceful, and with dramatic cliff coastlines.

As for this movie, I was always taught about the Caribs who lived on the islands before the white man came and started importing slaves (and were not black, despite the impression left on oyceter). They spoke pidgin to communicate with the Europeans (really not an uncommon practice, and not a denigrating one, as far as I can tell) and performed religious cannibalism. Or that's what we were told. I understand it's under dispute right now--but under dispute. I'm not aware of it having been disproven. I was also startled to see that she couldn't understand the witchy-woman. I processed her as an Obeah-type practicioner because of her Jamaican accent (it seemed to waver to a couple other islands here and there, but predominantly yardie). Obviously I'm hardly a good control subject, but usually I can tell when it's not understandable.