We've got some more early word on how Nicole Kidman's "Invasion" is a mess -- plus the first test screening / junket reviews of "Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End."

Both reports come from the same source, but we'll start with "Invasion." From two early reactions we've got feedback like this:

"There is absolutely no suspense, no thrills, no nothing for any movie goer looking for such ... This film was a monumental let down. Avoid at all costs."

And the second guy?

"As it stands now, the only use this version has is a textbook example as to how badly studio interference can ruin a film."

That "interference" includes booting the original director (Oliver Hirschbiegel) and semi-starting from scratch with James McTeigue and the Wachowski brothers -- among numerous other headaches.



Yikes. Unkind word from the early viewers indeed. But you clicked in to get the early word on "Pirates 3," right? I had to scan through randomly to find a few pullable quotes, but here's something:

"It could’ve stood to lose 30 minutes or so, but for the most part, it was enjoyable. It doesn’t stand up to the first but it surpasses the second."

Boom, short and sweet. Ah, but there's a second scooper:

"I wont give too much away, except to say --- its much darker and really lacks the humor found in the first two."

So there you go. Two early Pirate-watchers kinda liked it. Does that have any bearing on whether or not you'll see it?

Source: AICN