The Lone Ranger (Post-release)

[azheat01]

If anything it did have a well judged and rousing use of the William Tell overture.

I was hoping the overture would be in there! Despite the reviews, I'm still looking forward to seeing this.

 

[PHArchivist]

I was hoping the overture would be in there! Despite the reviews, I'm still looking forward to seeing this.

Its entertaining. But poorly executed.

Early discussion here about "the price of admission", or related ROI... For me, seeing Monument Valley on the Big Screen again was worth the price of admission.

But Depp sucked...

 

[A Toxic Microbe]

I just really don't like Johnny Depp anymore. He seems to be playing the same characters, in a way, now. Like, I could see a lot of Jack Sparrow in the trailer. And I'm really kind of sick of Jack Sparrow.

 

[Kerr Avon]

Depp is a crutch that they used for the movie to lean on. And sounds like that crutch broke and the movie fell on it's ass.

 

[dbalschi]

When you depict gruesome deaths for laughs when your title character is out for justice, I'm not laughing.

Have you seen the movie? I didn't like it but never once did I get the feeling that they depicted a gruesome death for laughs.

 

[Capn_Jack_Savvy]

Just saw the movie and I would give it a 3 out of 5 stars. It wasn't a great movie but it also wasn't bad. Entertaining for a popcorn tub and soda type of movie. I wasn't expecting a great epic but simply an action film. The entire so called gruesome scene with the heart was mostly implied and off camera. Butch biting the heart was also implied and you never actually see him do so! That moment was to establish him as the Wendingo which was a key concept from the original script before rewrites.

 

[Jeyl]

The Cinema Snob reviews 1981's "Legend of the Lone Ranger" with inevitable comparisons to the newer one.

 

[Capn_Jack_Savvy]

The Cinema Snob reviews 1981's "Legend of the Lone Ranger" with inevitable comparisons to the newer one.

Unfortunately I could not sit through more than 2 minutes of that review!

 

[JD]

I've actually been looking for a copy of that. I remember watching it a million years ago but seems to have disappeared.

 

[JD]

Have you seen the movie? I didn't like it but never once did I get the feeling that they depicted a gruesome death for laughs.

I saw it.

 

[JD]

Have you seen the movie? I didn't like it but never once did I get the feeling that they depicted a gruesome death for laughs.

The death's were gruesome and somewhat out of place in this movie - but not at all for laughs; it doesn't take a genius to see that they were trying to establish an opposite of John Reid and that Cavendish was a butcher that deserved to die.

 

[autoprops713]

Just saw this last night and yep, I'll say it....it gave me a whole new appreciation for "The Legend of the Lone Ranger". I liked it when I saw it as a kid and Michael Horse was a pretty damn good Tonto. Haha...plus you get an over-the-top Christopher Lloyd as Cavendish. Give me a hazy out of focus 80's Lone Ranger over an HD super CGI version any day.

Yes, I'm old.

 

[HanSolo2187]

Have you seen the movie? I didn't like it but never once did I get the feeling that they depicted a gruesome death for laughs.

Agreed. In fact, the "gruesome" death that keeps getting mentioned wasn't even shown directly - it was shown in the reflection of a metal object, thus mostly distorted and hard to discern what you were seeing. Most of the violence was "from afar" or implied and, on top of that, the Lone Ranger doesn't directly kill a single person in the movie.

I liked the move and didn't understand the "issues" that everyone has with it. I'd give it 7/10 or so.

 

[Art Andrews]

Singularly horrific... on pretty much every level. I just don't understand who the audience for this movie was supposed to be. I would have thought it was a kid's movie given that their was barely a single serious moment, but as has been mentioned, there was some pretty gruesome (regardless of not not being graphic) elements. Depp was horrible. Absolutely horrible. Captain Jakc has ruined him and all Tonto really amounted to was Indian Jack. The Lone Ranger was a bumbling dufus who needed Mr constant-comedy-relief (is it really "relief" when there is no real tension to be relieved of?) to get him through every situation. What really makes me sad is to see that a lot of people seemed to find this movie entertaining. I just don't know what they saw in it.

 

[Jet Beetle]

It's a Gore Verbinski film written by Ted Elliott and Terry Rossio. This team has about as much interest in human dignity as the 1918 flu pandemic.

I'll jump in here -- Terry Rossio was the only one who really worked on the screenplay, but off of an outline put together by he and Ted 12 years ago so he tossed him a shared credit. Terry crafted a great take which got Disney to purchase the rights to Lone Ranger from Fox, then Terry executed the script which got the movie greenlit - then Depp was voiced his interest in playing Tonto which the studio thought would be money in the bag - and it may have been, if Depp hadn't demanded one of his friends work on the screenplay with him - Gore signed on because of Terry's screenplay, not knowing the script was being rewritten until his deal was signed (studio figured Terry and Gore would put things back in place) - the screenplay came back and was a mess - but Depp wanted the changes he had worked on to remain, so they did. As most here know I'm very close with Terry and when he was kept away from this film (a dream project he'd wanted for years) I'd never seen him so down. Gore called and had Terry come to the set to touch up the screenplay here and there but Depp kept close watch on the things he and his buddy had put in the script - pretty much leaving everyone powerless (the studio had banked this film on his fan base built by Pirates - and the last time they doubted him was when they questioned the direction he was taking Jack Sparrow in the first Pirates - they figured he knew what he was doing this time as well - this time they were wrong.

Terry's was a straight forward western adventure than employed a bit of Indian mysticism - it would have been fantastic, but remember, no one ever trusts the writer, especially if they are excited about the project at hand.

 

[Jet Beetle]

In my humble opinion, the problems with this film begin and end with Elliott and Rossio.

To me, the story and script structure seems bloated, convoluted,and to some degree incoherent.

Wow, sounds like I'm describing Pirates 2 and 3...!

Anyway, I am no longer a fan of this writing team and question why Bruckheimer and Disney continue to turn to them.

I would genuinely like to hear Jet Beetle's insight and opinions, as I am admittendly but an arm-chair critic.

To go with what I wrote above - Pirates 2 and 3 and 4 and 5 all suffer from studio micro managing and star power. The first Pirates film was pretty much unmonitored thanks to Bruckheimer who kept notes at bay - but once you have a movie that hits a billion dollars, everyone wants to have their say. The process of writing these films became so frustrating that Ted finally retired from writing all together because of the notes they were being forced to execute -- and trust me when I tell you these guys have faced the devil before - but never like this. I think the last thing he did was when they completed a total rewrite on National Treasure 2. Terry stuck with the movies because he still believes in the system sometimes - he's a genius when it comes to writing - and it's hard to turn people like him completely off of something they feel they can bring something to. The second and third Pirate films were designed by them to work on many levels - but people began pulling from here and there until things that suffered from tampering were simply fixed with a band-aid if it allowed Jack Sparrow more screen time - I mean that's what the audience wants, right? More Jack Sparrow. Get rid of this or give this to Johnny - Haven't you ever wondered how one of the greatest Chinese Cinema action stars was reduced to nothing more than a brief cameo - well, because Jack Sparrow should get all the cool fight stuff.

 

[PHArchivist]

To go with what I wrote above - Pirates 2 and 3 and 4 and 5 all suffer from studio micro managing and star power...

Profound, informed, and appreciated insight, JB. Thanks!

It is always so easy for us arm-chair critics to neglect to realize the politics and various "malevolent forces" at hand when it comes to film production. Too many cooks in the kitchen can create a mess...

 

[PHArchivist]

(the studio had banked this film on his fan base built by Pirates - and the last time they doubted him was when they questioned the direction he was taking Jack Sparrow in the first Pirates - they figured he knew what he was doing this time as well - this time they were wrong.

Not sure that I can ever recall a major film trailer that relied on the crutch of subliminal imagery referencing an earlier film. If the film/trailer cannot stand on its own merits with out a reminder that its lineage is connected to a prior mega-hit, then there are potential problems at hand.

Depp was wrong too. I think he firmly beleived he'd created yet another iconic, amusing, and highly entertaining character - ala Sparrow - when his role as Tonto fell flat.

Terry's was a straight forward western adventure than employed a bit of Indian mysticism - it would have been fantastic, but remember, no one ever trusts the writer, especially if they are excited about the project at hand.

I think that is the film we all wanted to see...

 

[Jeyl]

I'll jump in here -- Terry Rossio was the only one who really worked on the screenplay, but off of an outline put together by he and Ted 12 years ago so he tossed him a shared credit. Terry crafted a great take which got Disney to purchase the rights to Lone Ranger from Fox, then Terry executed the script which got the movie greenlit - then Depp was voiced his interest in playing Tonto which the studio thought would be money in the bag - and it may have been, if Depp hadn't demanded one of his friends work on the screenplay with him - Gore signed on because of Terry's screenplay, not knowing the script was being rewritten until his deal was signed (studio figured Terry and Gore would put things back in place) - the screenplay came back and was a mess - but Depp wanted the changes he had worked on to remain, so they did. As most here know I'm very close with Terry and when he was kept away from this film (a dream project he'd wanted for years) I'd never seen him so down. Gore called and had Terry come to the set to touch up the screenplay here and there but Depp kept close watch on the things he and his buddy had put in the script - pretty much leaving everyone powerless (the studio had banked this film on his fan base built by Pirates - and the last time they doubted him was when they questioned the direction he was taking Jack Sparrow in the first Pirates - they figured he knew what he was doing this time as well - this time they were wrong.

Terry's was a straight forward western adventure than employed a bit of Indian mysticism - it would have been fantastic, but remember, no one ever trusts the writer, especially if they are excited about the project at hand.

That's.. wow. That is so telling. Thank you Jet for coming out with this. It's so easy to associate writers to a project they're all credited with and assume they're just doing their usual schtick again. While I still have some issues with the pirate films, they don't deserve that flu comment. I'm sorry.

 

[EyeofSauron]

What really makes me sad is to see that a lot of people seemed to find this movie entertaining. I just don't know what they saw in it.