Author Topic: The Lone Ranger  (Read 1597 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline AmericanPatriot

  • Conservative Hero
  • ****
  • Posts: 2183
The Lone Ranger
« on: July 05, 2013, 10:51:51 AM »
Clayton Moore is spinning in his grave.
Probably Jay Silverheels,too

Saw the Lone Ranger at the drive in last night

It was entertaining but the only real similarity to the original was there was a guy with a mask that rode a white horse named Silver and had an indian side kick

It was campy. Not to the extent the old Batman TV show was but it wasn't  the "real" Lone Ranger.

Johnny Depp was certainly interesting as Tonto.
The guy who played the Lone Ranger was a doofus

Probably, I am too much of a traditionalist.

You just don't screw with the Lone Ranger!!!!

Online Pandora

  • Administrator
  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 19529
  • I iz also makin a list. U on it pal.
Re: The Lone Ranger
« Reply #1 on: July 05, 2013, 11:28:01 AM »
Quote
The guy who played the Lone Ranger was a doofus

Figures.  The White guy ........
"Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer." - Mark Twain

"Let us assume for the moment everything you say about me is true. That just makes your problem bigger, doesn't it?"

charlesoakwood

  • Guest
Re: The Lone Ranger
« Reply #2 on: July 05, 2013, 12:25:41 PM »

Depp as Tonto is a tip off.  I expected a western Pirates of the Caribbean. It seems that it fell short of that, too bad.  If the Ranger were as strong a character as Tonto it may have been hilarious.  Too risky for Hollywood.

Online Libertas

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 63665
  • Alea iacta est! Libertatem aut mori!
Re: The Lone Ranger
« Reply #3 on: July 07, 2013, 06:48:20 PM »
Seems to be universally recognized as a major flop.
We are now where The Founders were when they faced despotism.

Offline Sectionhand

  • Conservative Hero
  • ****
  • Posts: 2520
Re: The Lone Ranger
« Reply #4 on: July 08, 2013, 10:33:00 AM »

Depp as Tonto is a tip off.  I expected a western Pirates of the Caribbean. It seems that it fell short of that, too bad.  If the Ranger were as strong a character as Tonto it may have been hilarious.  Too risky for Hollywood.


"Tonto of the Caribbean"

Offline trapeze

  • Administrator
  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 6367
  • Hippies smell bad. Go away, hippie.
Re: The Lone Ranger
« Reply #5 on: July 08, 2013, 11:01:17 AM »
I did not understand the direction that this movie decided to take, that of an action comedy. I knew that it would be in that direction with Depp in either role. Depp walking around with a dead bird on his head for the whole movie is only one indication of the stupidity on display here.

There is very little doubt that this movie was pitched to the studio geniuses as "Pirates of the Caribbean" in the old west.

A better pitch that would have resulted in a (potentially) better movie would have been "Batman Begins" in the old west.

This movie would have been an absolute huge success if they had painted the Lone Ranger as a dark and brooding character who is bent on avenging his friends at all costs. I would even say that it would have been really good to see Depp be forced to play it straight (in either role) for a change. I would have paid to see a serious Depp play a badass menacing good guy instead of a flippant smart ass. I would have paid to see the Lone Ranger act like Dirty Harry in his  actions to take down the bad guys.

The people who pitched this movie would have been more honest if they had said that this was going to be the "Green Hornet" in the old west. That is an apt comparison. The "Pirates" movies were at least watchable and entertaining with mostly good script writing...well, more good than bad. But the "Green Hornet" missed the boat for the exact same reason: it went for action comedy when it should have gone for dark and sinister action. You can still have comedy in the dark action flicks, but it's dry comedy that gives you an occasional laugh between serious things...an unexpected  stress reliever...rather than an attempt at a yuck-it-up-fest.

So...what lessons will be learned? Will anyone learn that you don't take serious bits of Americana and American folk lore and dress it up in ridiculousness and camp? Almost certainly not.

No, the takeaway by the people who make the money decisions will be that westerns don't make money anymore and we will not see another one for a generation.
In a doomsday scenario, hippies will be among the first casualties. So not everything about doomsday will be bad.

Online Libertas

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 63665
  • Alea iacta est! Libertatem aut mori!
Re: The Lone Ranger
« Reply #6 on: July 08, 2013, 11:22:00 AM »
I did not understand the direction that this movie decided to take, that of an action comedy. I knew that it would be in that direction with Depp in either role. Depp walking around with a dead bird on his head for the whole movie is only one indication of the stupidity on display here.

There is very little doubt that this movie was pitched to the studio geniuses as "Pirates of the Caribbean" in the old west.

A better pitch that would have resulted in a (potentially) better movie would have been "Batman Begins" in the old west.

This movie would have been an absolute huge success if they had painted the Lone Ranger as a dark and brooding character who is bent on avenging his friends at all costs. I would even say that it would have been really good to see Depp be forced to play it straight (in either role) for a change. I would have paid to see a serious Depp play a badass menacing good guy instead of a flippant smart ass. I would have paid to see the Lone Ranger act like Dirty Harry in his  actions to take down the bad guys.

The people who pitched this movie would have been more honest if they had said that this was going to be the "Green Hornet" in the old west. That is an apt comparison. The "Pirates" movies were at least watchable and entertaining with mostly good script writing...well, more good than bad. But the "Green Hornet" missed the boat for the exact same reason: it went for action comedy when it should have gone for dark and sinister action. You can still have comedy in the dark action flicks, but it's dry comedy that gives you an occasional laugh between serious things...an unexpected  stress reliever...rather than an attempt at a yuck-it-up-fest.

So...what lessons will be learned? Will anyone learn that you don't take serious bits of Americana and American folk lore and dress it up in ridiculousness and camp? Almost certainly not.

No, the takeaway by the people who make the money decisions will be that westerns don't make money anymore and we will not see another one for a generation.

Which is stupid. Silverado was good and made money.  Hollywood sucks.
We are now where The Founders were when they faced despotism.

Offline AmericanPatriot

  • Conservative Hero
  • ****
  • Posts: 2183
Re: The Lone Ranger
« Reply #7 on: July 08, 2013, 12:19:15 PM »
Heard a few minutes of Beck today about this.
He said it cost $250 million!!!!!

Depp would have been quite capable of playing it straight.
He's nuts but quite talented.
He's played some quality roles

Trap is a much better reviewer than me

Offline trapeze

  • Administrator
  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 6367
  • Hippies smell bad. Go away, hippie.
Re: The Lone Ranger
« Reply #8 on: July 08, 2013, 12:45:01 PM »
Which is stupid. Silverado was good and made money.  Hollywood sucks.

No question about it. My particular favorite from recent years was "Open Range" which was a terrific movie despite the usual wooden acting by Kevin Costner. It had a decent script, good actions scenes, great comedic moments and an outstanding backdrop for the filming. Plus Duvall, of course.

Westerns, like any other movie genre, can be outstanding. But a $250 bomb will, sadly, put a damper on them for a while.

"John Carter," "After Earth" and "Oblivion" will probably do the same for big budget science fiction, too, other than recognized can't miss franchises like Star Wars and Star Trek.

So, look forward to lots of comic book stuff for a while because it seems to be the only genre which can't seem to make a losing picture. Even the out-and-out garbage comic book movies somehow seem to turn a profit.
In a doomsday scenario, hippies will be among the first casualties. So not everything about doomsday will be bad.

Offline trapeze

  • Administrator
  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 6367
  • Hippies smell bad. Go away, hippie.
Re: The Lone Ranger
« Reply #9 on: July 08, 2013, 12:57:38 PM »
Trap is a much better reviewer than me

Thanks, but I haven't seen it yet and won't if I have my way. mrs. trapeze may force me to take our thirteen-year-old daughter, though. mrs. trapeze has legendarily poor judgement when it comes to selecting movies. You would think that after over twenty five years of marriage with me saying, "This will suck. Please don't make me go," and her saying afterwards, "You were right, that really sucked...what a waste of money," she would trust my instincts but, no. Not bragging or anything but I can't remember the last time that I was wrong about the overall state of a movie...either being pleasantly or unpleasantly surprised that a movie either didn't suck or really did.

But hey, here's another comparison of the Lone Ranger to a total big budget western suckfest. Think about Will Smith in the "Wild, Wild West" abortion. That was a really good television show from my younger days. It was a little goofy but not much and it had decent acting and writing. The movie was a "vehicle" for Will Smith and, his race aside, I thought that it was a complete mismatch in casting. Plus the script was stupid and the CGI effects were largely unnecessary. What they should have done was do what the television series mostly aimed at which was a James Bond of the west theme. The movie, while not total camp (which might have worked given the source material), was not nailed down to a specific sub-genre either and kind of wandered all over the place. When it was all over it was just a mess and completely unwatchable.

The thing that makes big budget bombs noteworthy (other than how expensive a mistake they were) is that they really do point out that going to the movies is becoming increasingly too expensive and the movie-going public is beginning to become a bit more discriminating about how they dole out their entertainment dollar. You can't just take a date or the family to something without shelling out big bucks these days so it's sort of an investment or, at least, people are starting to treat them that way. Sure, it's always been an investment in your time and no one wants to waste a couple of hours on crappy entertainment but, if you have to dump a small fortune for the dubious pleasure, too, well...that's just adding injury to insult.
« Last Edit: July 08, 2013, 01:03:53 PM by trapeze »
In a doomsday scenario, hippies will be among the first casualties. So not everything about doomsday will be bad.

charlesoakwood

  • Guest
Re: The Lone Ranger
« Reply #10 on: July 08, 2013, 01:50:50 PM »

If I ventured into a theater it would be a multi-cinema, if, upon discovering my choice was poor I would have the opportunity to stroll through three or four other movies before it became necessary to exit the theater.
 

Offline Weisshaupt

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 5731
Re: The Lone Ranger
« Reply #11 on: July 08, 2013, 03:25:10 PM »

The thing that makes big budget bombs noteworthy (other than how expensive a mistake they were) is that they really do point out that going to the movies is becoming increasingly too expensive and the movie-going public is beginning to become a bit more discriminating about how they dole out their entertainment dollar. You can't just take a date or the family to something without shelling out big bucks these days so it's sort of an investment or, at least, people are starting to treat them that way. Sure, it's always been an investment in your time and no one wants to waste a couple of hours on crappy entertainment but, if you have to dump a small fortune for the dubious pleasure, too, well...that's just adding injury to insult.

Since its summer Michelle has been taking the kids to see some stuff - but its around $30  just for tickets when we all go.   We sawEPIC,  Monsters University and The new Despicable Me. All were cute, and for the most part benign and devoid of political content. Nathan Fillion even has a role in Monsters so that was fun, but overall? Meh.   I could have easily waited 4-6 months and bought the kids the DVD for $12 and then can can watch it as many times as the please for a less than a die of electricity. I think there is a growing attitude of just waiting.. once you make the transition to being 6-months to  a year behind, its really not much of a hassle.

Online Pandora

  • Administrator
  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 19529
  • I iz also makin a list. U on it pal.
Re: The Lone Ranger
« Reply #12 on: July 08, 2013, 03:58:02 PM »

The thing that makes big budget bombs noteworthy (other than how expensive a mistake they were) is that they really do point out that going to the movies is becoming increasingly too expensive and the movie-going public is beginning to become a bit more discriminating about how they dole out their entertainment dollar. You can't just take a date or the family to something without shelling out big bucks these days so it's sort of an investment or, at least, people are starting to treat them that way. Sure, it's always been an investment in your time and no one wants to waste a couple of hours on crappy entertainment but, if you have to dump a small fortune for the dubious pleasure, too, well...that's just adding injury to insult.

Since its summer Michelle has been taking the kids to see some stuff - but its around $30  just for tickets when we all go.   We sawEPIC,  Monsters University and The new Despicable Me. All were cute, and for the most part benign and devoid of political content. Nathan Fillion even has a role in Monsters so that was fun, but overall? Meh.   I could have easily waited 4-6 months and bought the kids the DVD for $12 and then can can watch it as many times as the please for a less than a die of electricity. I think there is a growing attitude of just waiting.. once you make the transition to being 6-months to  a year behind, its really not much of a hassle.

I can attest to that.  I miss "going to the movies" less than none. 

Last time I was talked into it was to see "Atlas Shrugged".  I couldn't get the seat to work by sitting in it -- it was supposed to slide forward a bit -- because "midget", but at least there wasn't the usual loud talking/candy throwing/package rattling/phone ringing and no one was kicking the back of my seat.

We've been buying older movies on DVD, and some newer ones once the prices drop a bit, building up a library per se, and I'm just fine doing it this way.
"Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer." - Mark Twain

"Let us assume for the moment everything you say about me is true. That just makes your problem bigger, doesn't it?"

Online IronDioPriest

  • Administrator
  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 10828
  • I refuse to accept my civil servants as my rulers
Re: The Lone Ranger
« Reply #13 on: July 08, 2013, 04:54:12 PM »
I love going to the movies. I usually reserve my moviegoing for those films that lend themselves to the big-screen visually, and theater-quality audio.
"A strict observance of the written laws is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to written law, would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the end to the means."

- Thomas Jefferson

Offline Predator Don

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 4576
Re: The Lone Ranger
« Reply #14 on: July 08, 2013, 06:41:49 PM »
I love going to the movies. I usually reserve my moviegoing for those films that lend themselves to the big-screen visually, and theater-quality audio.


I also like going. I'm a big sy fy guy, so the recent stuff coming out I've enjoyed. Next on my list is Pacific Rim. Previews look like Godzilla, but cooler monsters, against the Power Rangers on steroids. I'm hoping I don't detect an agenda. I'm sure global warming will be mentioned.
I'm not always engulfed in scandals, but when I am, I make sure I blame others.

Offline Alphabet Soup

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 5610
  • Hier standt ich. Ich kann nicht anders
Re: The Lone Ranger
« Reply #15 on: July 08, 2013, 09:33:59 PM »
I remember going to the movies. But I can't recall when.

Growing up in small-town America we did the Saturday afternoon matinee thing where a local TV personality would be on hand to emcee the show, do giveaways, tell jokes and ham it up. We watched Mysterious Island, and The Fly, and I was a Teenage Frankenstein and threw popcorn at each other and had a grand time.

Going to the movies with my pop was a treat. He didn't care for the theater experience so when my mom would talk him into going it was a special event. We saw How the West Was Won, and Guns of Navarrone, and The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance. My pop was anything but a movie connoisseur but when he liked a movie he really liked it. We say Dr. No twice (was it Ursula Andress?).

I did a lot of the "dinner and a movie" dating but already by then the experience had changed. There was more tension with low-life assholes who apparently didn't realize they weren't 8 years old anymore. Of course that was also around the time when I was now legal to carry. My theater-going dwindled down to a tiny trickle. Anything worth watching could (sooner or later) be found on VHS at Blockbuster.

Then I went through a Renaissance of sorts with kids and movies. A lot of the stuff was really cheesy but the excitement of the experience was back - even if only vicariously. I miss that.

I have no interest in going to movies now. What a curmudgeon!

Offline trapeze

  • Administrator
  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 6367
  • Hippies smell bad. Go away, hippie.
Re: The Lone Ranger
« Reply #16 on: July 08, 2013, 10:28:32 PM »
So this guy saw the movie and wrote this:

Quote
...I haven't seen this film, but reviewers consistently tell the tale of a Tonto-centric film with a deluded idiot Lone Ranger who is idealistic and ignorant, with a wise, omni-competent Tonto.  The entire story is about Tonto "setting the record straight" in 1933 talking to kids about the real old west.  The US military is evil and corrupt and incompetent, so horrible you cheer for the Indians who come to the real rescue.  The white man is consistently awful and wicked.  Cowboys were monsters, settlers were awful, on and on it goes.

From what I've read, its like Howard Zinn wrote the screenplay.  I guess the people behind the film thought it would be all clever and ironic to turn the Lone Ranger on its head - after all it worked so well for Green Hornet... oh yeah - and maybe they figured a movie that kicks America in the pills for two hours in its most beloved historical era would do well overseas.

And then there is this:

Quote
So what happened this year? Variety, The Hollywood Reporter and every other publication that reports on the entertainment industry is trying to figure out why some of the most-hyped films of the summer are– let’s face it–the f-word: “flops.”  The suggested reasons for the poor box office showings range from poor marketing to the 17-year cycle of the cicadas.

I’ve been on vacation for one week and have seen 16 films. (OK—most were part of the Nantucket Film Festival)—but the others have been doozies: “World War Z,”  “White House Down,” and “The Lone Ranger.”

Hollywood analysts are all stumped: How could the dynamic directors Marc Forster, Roland Emmerich, and  Gore Verbinski have been so wrong? Why aren’t audiences flocking to see Brad Pitt, Jamie Foxx, Channing Tatum, and Johnny Depp? Some of these budgets clocked in at around a quarter of a billion dollars. What went wrong?

Well–look at the scripts!

Both saying what I said or wanted to say but probably better than the way I said it.
In a doomsday scenario, hippies will be among the first casualties. So not everything about doomsday will be bad.

Offline Weisshaupt

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 5731
Re: The Lone Ranger
« Reply #17 on: July 08, 2013, 11:07:00 PM »
How to produce a Hollywood Blockbuster

1) Find the guys whose Sy-fy scripts were rejected.
2) Hire Actors who have been successful in the past and who have publicly gone on one liberal rant or another to improve their holly wood street cred while alienating 1/2 of your potential audience.
3) Write a script whose main point is  political agenda- write it to a three 3 year old level and fill it with wooden, boring characters and  huge plot holes so you can deliberately insult the intelligence of those folks from flyover country shelling out $8-12 per ticket.
4) Show it to your yes men and make sure they say yes. If they fail to say yes, fire the yes men and hire new yes men and repeat.
5) Throw in a lot of CGI. A Lot. Gobs of it. The Action it creates should show off that it is, in fact, CGI, and it should not in anyway contribute to plot or story.If possible fast cuts extreme closeups and fast  pans should be used to attempt to induce motion sickness and vomiting in the Audience. Promote the hell out of the 3d release  to maximize this effect
6) now figure out how to spend as much money on the "movie" as possible but make sure the bulk of it goes to lavish cast parties and promotional tours. Really, spend as litte on actul production, sets or retakes to get the acting right as you can. These are morons watching, so really , how good does it need to be to fool them into thinking it was good?
7) Insert lots of subliminals to suggest the movie is good , and product placements so you can tie it in with a Taco Bell promotion and market the hell out of it.
8) If possible, remake old movies and stories from Traditional american  and give them a fresh new twist in which America is the bad guy.  No one will see that coming
9) Act really, really surprised that your over budget, endless action CGI motion sickness fest of storyless, but still  agenda driven pile of crap doesn't do well , and then blame it on middle America being too stupid to appreciate your genius.
10) repeat.

 


 

Offline Predator Don

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 4576
Re: The Lone Ranger
« Reply #18 on: July 08, 2013, 11:13:59 PM »
So this guy saw the movie and wrote this:

Quote
...I haven't seen this film, but reviewers consistently tell the tale of a Tonto-centric film with a deluded idiot Lone Ranger who is idealistic and ignorant, with a wise, omni-competent Tonto.  The entire story is about Tonto "setting the record straight" in 1933 talking to kids about the real old west.  The US military is evil and corrupt and incompetent, so horrible you cheer for the Indians who come to the real rescue.  The white man is consistently awful and wicked.  Cowboys were monsters, settlers were awful, on and on it goes.

From what I've read, its like Howard Zinn wrote the screenplay.  I guess the people behind the film thought it would be all clever and ironic to turn the Lone Ranger on its head - after all it worked so well for Green Hornet... oh yeah - and maybe they figured a movie that kicks America in the pills for two hours in its most beloved historical era would do well overseas.

And then there is this:

Quote
So what happened this year? Variety, The Hollywood Reporter and every other publication that reports on the entertainment industry is trying to figure out why some of the most-hyped films of the summer are– let’s face it–the f-word: “flops.”  The suggested reasons for the poor box office showings range from poor marketing to the 17-year cycle of the cicadas.

I’ve been on vacation for one week and have seen 16 films. (OK—most were part of the Nantucket Film Festival)—but the others have been doozies: “World War Z,”  “White House Down,” and “The Lone Ranger.”

Hollywood analysts are all stumped: How could the dynamic directors Marc Forster, Roland Emmerich, and  Gore Verbinski have been so wrong? Why aren’t audiences flocking to see Brad Pitt, Jamie Foxx, Channing Tatum, and Johnny Depp? Some of these budgets clocked in at around a quarter of a billion dollars. What went wrong?

Well–look at the scripts!

Both saying what I said or wanted to say but probably better than the way I said it.



Ok...I'll admit it.....I've seen White House down( my review is here somewhere), world war z, (which was decent until the end) and Lone Ranger ( I should have known a depp movie would be campy)

I have friends who like the movies and know ill go if they call me. The directors need to drop the liberal agenda and just make movies. They seem to forget Obama voters have no money, they only want free stuff and unfortunately, movies are not free.  I'll take this moment to again rip White House down. Pure propaganda. The director should be blackballed and the stockholders who control whatever house invested in this mess should insist on new leadership. Channing tatum must be an idiot for taking this gig. I already know Jamie fox is a stupid idiot.
I'm not always engulfed in scandals, but when I am, I make sure I blame others.